how could they drive us out if we didn't go there ??? your boys played right into their hand.....why let the enemy dictate ???? you are right... the biggest threat was terrorist, but not all terror against us, was foreign born and most of it was domestic & economic. Guys like you don't sweat the big stuff... follow the money... that's what matters right???? ?:kiss:
Obama admits mistake
- Thread starter Cie
- Start date
how could they drive us out if we didn't go there ??? your boys played right into their hand.....why let the enemy dictate ???? you are right... the biggest threat was terrorist, but not all terror against us, was foreign born and most of it was domestic & economic. Guys like you don't sweat the big stuff... follow the money... that's what matters right???? ?:kiss:
We played into their hands--then I assume you are suggesting that their intent was-
- to be confined to caves instead of jet setting around the world
-to get their ass kicked out of Iraq after saying they would drive us out.
--to have two countries in middle east converted to democracies ETC
I believe UBL made his intent known--that we would fail in all the above--and sad thing is he would have been correct on all points had liberals won in 04.
:0corn
These points are at best arguable - and of course impossible to judge or measure. Which of course make them easy to say and try to win some kind of point.
The FACT of the matter is, had we stayed on task after 9-11 and focused on finding the jet-setter, none of the other issues would have mattered nearly as much, if at all. And I am quite certain a democratic administration would have given that more importance than attacking Iraq. Of course we could go after nearly any country we don't agree with and take them over, and replace them with some sort of democracy - has that ever been in doubt? For the first time in history we just decided to do that, and what have we really gained?
Who in Iraq got their asses kicked out of Iraq? The terrorists? Is that what you are hinting at? The terrorists never were in Iraq, as most know, until we attacked it. And even then, there were extremely small contingents of them there.
And since when do we give credence to ridiculous statements that are made by radicals to sensationalize situations and try to motivate their own radical elements? Do you give credence to Bin Laden who said his main goal was to cause economic distress to the United States, and beat us with our own aggressive tendencies under certain administrations? You always gave credence to the terrorists when you said how badly they wanted Obama to be President, and not a peep about it since they have been overtly negative and attacked him publicly ever since he won the job. The FACTS are that as far as anyone knows, the man who actually attacked us has not been found, we are in economic distress for many reasons due to Bin Laden and his efforts (9-11, right Wayne? Our ongoing war effort against terrorists in Iraq, right Wayne?).
You do have one point pretty much correct, though. I doubt we'd be in the same situation if the dems had been in control. For many reasons, I think we'd be in much better shape. It's all in how and when you spin things, really.
Three countries, Wayne. Somehow you forgot about Palestine, which after Afghanistan is probably the most ideal model of democracy.
