As much debating as we go through, it's nice to see what appears to be the U.S. successfully taking out some of Al Qaeda's top men, including their master bomb maker, in the recent missile strike in Pakistan (it's sad to see those pigs always hiding out in civilian houses where children are present, but whaddya expect, I guess).

Now this hits the news today:

God's permission? Has he been talking to Pat Robertson or Ray Nagin?

But not murder, right?

It was probably the video of the Steelers-Colts game playing in the background that gave it away.

So this scumbag wants a truce now, huh? I would sure like to think, even a little, that the recent killing of some of his top guys rattled his cages a bit. Hopefully one day we can get him.

We probably would have ALREADY gotten him had we not had a HUGE and unnecessary distraction called Iraq. Had we not diverted much needed personnel, equipment, money and attention to Iraq, Osama Bin Laden would most likely have been in our custody a long time ago.

As you like to say MIB, the FACTS and the TRUTH do hurt.

No matter what the outcome of the current Iraq conflict, the facts surrounding its inception will not change. The ends do not justify the means. We may well have ended up going to war with Iraq anyway but it should have been done as a LAST resort and without misleading the American people.

By the way, before anyone starts accusing me of being an anti-American, leftist, Commie, dove, let me remind you that I served honorably in Operation Desert Storm, the only LEGITIMATE and legal war with Iraq.

WARNING: If anyone plans to talk "hawk" with me they damn well better be an active member of the military or a war veteran. Frankly I'm sick of these arm chair SEK's (Somebody Else's Kids) warriors talking up a war that they didn't have the guts to put their own guts behind. Nothing pisses me off more than Toby Keith "I am an American Soldier" civilian ass****s pushing and profiting from every war that comes down the pike. Newsflash Toby, singing about kickin Arab ass and making millions of dollars doing it doesn't make you a soldier. In my opinion it makes you a rich, racist, pussy who I would rather not be subjected to. And he used to be one of my favorites.

I know I got a bit off the topic of this thread. Sorry but this is a very touchy topic for me.

[ January 19, 2006, 01:42 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

The tape is reported to have been made in December of 2005. The recent strike had nothing to do with it.

A little off topic, but I wanted to ask my fellow Tampan, Bucfan, a question: why CAN"T someone not in the military or with a child in the armed forces be vocal about his/her support for the war. I'm asking hypothetically since personally I feel that I was duped into supporting the war by this corrupt administration. BUT, just because someone is not fighting the war him/herself doesn't mean that we, as Americans, can't express our views on it. I mentioned on another thread that I, along with many Democrats, supported the U.S. involvement in Kosovo during the Clinton administration. However, I wasn't in the military and was in no danger. Neither were the millions of Democrats and liberals who supported NATO in that conflict. Would you have shut them up too? The answer to opinions you don't agree with is to express your own. With respect, Mike

For all that we hear about all these high ranking Al Qaeda officials being killed....how many high ranking officials could there possibly be?

UMREBEL:
my thoughts exactly. Shrub blew it big time, when he decided to invade Iraq. Osama was the threat, not Saddam. Iraq was not known as a haven for terrorists before we went in, but it sure is now! The heat was taken off Osama, and consequently he appears to still be around.

Thanks for the response Mike. I will try to answer your question succinctly and respectfully without spending too much time off topic. I'll answer your question here in case others, which I expect will be, are interested in my answer. Further discussion should be made in another thread or through personal messages.

Please don't misunderstand my statement. I am not coming down on people who agree with or support this war or any war that they believe in. If you notice my reference was specifically directed at "hawks" and never spoke of war supporters. To me there is a big difference in SUPPORTING a war and PROMOTING a war. People like Toby Keith and Bill O'Reilly promote wars without having a history with or a personal stake in them. I have a major issue with people who refer to themselves as "hawks" (which basically means they've never seen a war that they didn't like) who sit in the comfort of their homes with their families, going about their lives without the slighted interruption from the "inconveniences" of war. When you've seen young men and friends, in the prime of their lives blown apart or maimed for life it tends to up the ante on "acceptable losses" and the threshold for going to war.

This is why I have a major problem with having a Commander in Chief and government that is headed by men who have no real concept of what their asking others to sacrifice. I don't care if that person is Bill Clinton, G. W. Bush or Ronald Reagan or will be Hillary Clinton. We need leaders that declare war to be people who personally know the horrors and consequences of it personally.

We are now in a war with Iraq pushed by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove, not one of whom has spent one day in combat and with the exception of Bush none has spent one day in the military and not one of these men's children has spent one day in the military. Do you really think these guys know the true costs that they are inflicting on others and their families? Do you think that they would have taken us to war on false information, that they knew was false if they had had a son or daughter that would have been sent to the front lines? I don't think so.

I want to make it clear that even though I hate war I do realize that it is unfortunately, sometimes necessary. My issue with the Iraq war is not the conflict (short of its criminally poor management) but the shameful and deceptive way in which we were taken into it. It may have come to war anyway but had it been done legally, honestly and properly I would have been supportive. Like I said, I was very supportive of the first war and put my ass where my mouth was, but the circumstances were totally different and the lead up was done properly.

By the way, contrary to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove, there is a HUGE difference between supporting the troops and supporting the war. I can speak out against this criminal war and still have absolute faith in and support for the troops that are unfortunately being asked to fight it. They are doing the job that they pledged an oath to do. I will ALWAYS support our troops no matter how much I may disagree with the war they are asked to fight.

So, I don't take issue with those who support the war in Iraq or Kosovo or any other. One of the reasons I joined the military was to defend such freedoms of expression. But if your going to be a spokesperson for and a cheerleader for these conflicts and your going to talk to me you better be ready to show me that you've put your ass where your mouth is.

Well so much for succinct. I hope I answered your question.

PS: I don't want to make it sound like I'm letting war supporters off the hook. Let me clarify. When you support a war, ask yourself a couple of questions: Do I believe in it enough that I would be willing to die for it?; Do I believe in it enough that I would be willing to sacrifice my child for it? If the answer to either of these questions is No then you should re-examine your level of support for it. The fact that you are willing to sacrifice other people's kids to a cause is a very weak level of support for something as enormously profound as war. My war experiences and the fact that I have a beautiful twelve year old son have a lot to do with my strong opinions on this subject.

[ January 19, 2006, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

Yes, I know. I didn't intend to connect the two. I meant to ask that question as a second topic but obviously didn't word it properly.

So, the question stands alone: I wonder if the recent strike and termination of a few of Al Qaeda's henchmen has "bothered" Osama and Al-Z.

Werent we suppose to get this guy "dead or alive" over 4 and a half years ago? Oh wait, we had to go get all those WMD's out of a Iraq.


MIB \"facts\"

Uh, I think most people with at least a high school education--you'll get there soon, I'm sure, Raze--understand that "facts" are different from "beliefs." Those were my "beliefs" at that time, right or wrong.

MIB, I love ya man, you know I do, wink but you do play fast and loose with the "facts". Even when they're plagiarized (i.e. page 2 of the "Bush ordered NSA to spy on Americans" thread). I personally like you but I, as a non-neo-con conservative, often take issue with your "facts". Your word, not mine.

[ January 19, 2006, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

I can assure you, I am definitely not "fast" and quite the opposite of "loose." eek!

As I mentioned to our resident 6th grader above, my beliefs back then were that Osama was dead (maybe he has been but they're dubbing old footage--who the hell knows?). I based those beliefs on several things. As beliefs, of course they could have been wrong.

I also believed Pittsburgh would win last Sunday's football game. Fortunately, as a Steelers fan, I was wrong.

[ January 19, 2006, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: MIB ]

[ January 19, 2006, 02:10 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

MIB, your beliefs, whether wrong or right are not so much of a concern to me because when you're wrong it doesn't result in the death of thousands of our kids and tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands of innocent Iraqis, including those that were drafted into the Iraqi military and felt that they were gallantly defending their country. What I do have a problem with is when our leaders play hunches and make up "facts" that have such devastating consequences to our kids, their families and our international reputation. That's a FACT.

Rebelfan, I honor your service, man. I also agree that Warrantless Wiretapper could have gotten Osama bin Laden FOUR YEARS AGO, as Peter Bergen and others (including pro-WW Rethugs) have pointed out, but hey was too fixated on Iraq.

The other thing I wish people would keep in mind is this: given the elaborate propaganda games this administration has engaged in over the last six years, why on earth does anyone believe ANYTHING they say. Now I do hope they have actually hit Al-Qaida-related people. Maybe they did. But the truth of the matter is, they are paying for propaganda to be disseminated in Iraq, some of which has actually been reprinted on these shores. They are paying for propaganda here in the US, and have been sanctioned for illegal activity by the GAO. They make claims that have repeatedly been shown to be false, whether it's no knowledge of pre-9/11 intelligence about Osama bin Laden's actions, WMD finds, Al-Qaida/Saddam links, the costs of the Iraq War, the costs of the disastrous Medicare boondoggle, captures of high-ranking people in Afghanistan, what JimmyJeff was really up to, and so on. THEY NEVER TELL THE TRUTH. EVER.

If Warrantless Wiretapper had even ONE person in his administration who had a shred of credibility left, I'd believe him. But he's either driven them out (DiIulio, Lindsey, Clarke, etc.) or kept them silent. So until I see conclusive DNA evidence of Al-Qaidists having been killed, or Osama bin Laden's and Al-Zawahiri's heads on pikes or something similar, I ain't buying it. Also, how interesting that this tape materializes right as the Abramoff-related scandals are erupting, W's popularity is still below 40% and the Rethugs are trying to force ScAlito on the court. How convenient...

If they spent as much time following the 9/11 Commission's reasonable findings and arming our fighting men and women properly and taking care of them after they came back maimed and traumatized as they did with their propagandizing and psy ops, I might actually believe them.

(Note to MIB: ObL has previously offered a truce, after the bombings in Spain, so this is hardly new. And anyways, he doesn't have any control over the psychopath that WW spawned, Zarqawi. How many future ObL's has WW hatched over there in Iraq?)

Thanks for the response and clarification, Rebel. I now understand your take on "Hawks" vs. those that articualte support of a war.

News flash: Propaganda is common in war. Somebody needs a history lesson.

Thank God Almighty you and your ilk weren't around during WWII with this attitude, or we might all be speaking German (or perhaps Japanese).

I don't so much have a problem with using propaganda, even fake propaganda, against the enemy in a legitimate war. I DO have a problem with using false information propaganda on the home front to either start or promote a war.

Here's another Newsflash for ya MIB: Tens of thousands of his ilk (Liberals) fought and died to keep you and your ilk from speaking German or Japanese. Just because a person takes issue with this shameful war doesn't mean that they take issue with just and righteous wars such as WWII, Desert Storm or Afghanistan. Fantomas has consistently shown support for the legitimate war in Afghanistan.

There were a lot of arm chair soldiers like you back then too, the difference between them and you is that they were drafted and HAD to put their asses where their mouths were.

Still love ya though. Kind of a love/hate thing with you brother.

My brother's a Cubs fan. I'm a Sox fan. You do the math.

As far as the pre-war false information, I'd offer my explanation, but FT will come running in here calling me a Bush apologist, which I am definitely not. There are many aspects of both him and the war which tick me off, but I'm still not going to get into the pre-war false information discussion, because what I would end up posting would be opposed by the likes of FT and the other Bush haters (they're SO much like those rabid Clinton haters it's frightening, as well as tiresome).

I sure hope that there's more civility between you and your brother than between you and fantomas!

As far as your opinion on the pre-war intelligence (or lack thereof), don't worry about what fantomas might say. We're all big boys and girls here. If he disagrees with you I'm sure he'll rightfully say so. That shouldn't keep you from expressing your opinion. It's highly unlikely however, that it's an argument that I haven't heard, researched and dismissed before. I generally try to be informed about an issue before I attempt to argue for or against it. It helps to preserve face and credibility. From my research, and I am rather conservative (once again not neo-con), I have found too much evidence that this administration pushed the country into this war with exaggerations, misinformation (known to be untrue), partial information (spun for desired effect) and outright lies. The Downing Street memo was the final nail in the coffin for me. If you are going to try to convince me that the President, Vice-President, Sec. of Defense and all of the associated staff were in the dark about the bogus intelligence you won't even have to wait for fantomas to call you a Bush apologist. I'll do it for him. If that is the case then the whole lot of them should have been thrown out on their asses for gross incompetence at best or for being asleep at their posts at worst. Problem is this could not have happened without some very well orchestrated maneuvering, and you have to be awake to accomplish that.

I agree with you about the hate of Bush for hate's sake but I do see many things about his administration that could justify a lot of anger. Not the least of which is this war. The hate and attacks on Clinton, and once again I say this as a Conservative, seemed much more political and less policy based. In fact in many ways Clinton has proven to be more truely conservative than Bush. Fiscally, Clinton makes Bush look like a left wing liberal extremist. Yes Bush cut taxes, but only for the extraordinarily rich. You can't do that AND have uncontrolled spending by the Republican dominated House, Senate and Executive. Pork barrel spending is the worst in history...Not Conservative. Huge deficits...Not Conservative. Rampant corruption...Not Conservative. National Amendment to usurp a traditional states' right to determine marriage law...Not Conservative! Big government intrusion into personal freedoms through bedroom politics or non-warranted wire tapping (even after he, from his own lips, declared that such warrants would be required)...Not Conservative. Taking our country to war without sufficient personnel, equipment, mandate or an exit strategy...Not Conservative! I could go on.

Andrew Sullivan and I get along just fine.

So let's hear it MIB. If you think you have some information that I haven't considered, I'd be more than willing to consider it and will be the first to tell you and the world if it changes my mind. However, and I'm sure you know this by now, if I think you're full of crap I'll tell you and the world that too. wink

Sorry gentlemen/ladies, that's my last, off topic rant.

Now back to your regularly scheduled topic...Bin Laden Warns of Attacks...

[ January 19, 2006, 06:09 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

The hatred for Bush has had nothing to do with the war because it began the instant he began running in 2000 and intensified after the 2000 election and the SCOTUS decision. One can simply look at the left-wing rhetoric regarding that case itself. It was the same old bullshit playbook rantings: "Bush was appointed," "The Court gave Bush the election," etc. None of those idiots actually took the time to read the entire decision, the 12th amendment, and U.S. election law. Had they done so, they would understand why the Court really had no choice but to rule the way they did.

I digress a bit, but I'm not going to get into the pre-war stuff. I don't need the same anti-Bush idiots reciting the same ignorant responses.

I don't know what you expected from Democrats after 8 years of some of the nastiest partisan politics leveled against a President in U.S. history. You didn't expect some bitterness and vengeance? Couple that with the highly questionable circumstances and cronyism that resulted in his coronation. I live in Florida and am very familiar with some of the shananigans that went on down here. As far as the Supreme Court decision, I think there are a lot of reasonable arguements against the way the
Supreme Court handled it or if they should have heard the case to overturn the Florida Supreme Court in the first place. Contrary to right-wing opinion, the Florida Supreme Court was not deciding the national election. It was just a coincidence that the decision in Florida would decide the national election. Had Florida's decision had no affect on the national election the US Supreme Court would not have gotten involved and they should have done the same in this case. The FL SC was only dealing with the Florida electorate and they were the correct forum to decide the case. The very partisan, US Supreme Court stepped in and decided to stop the Florida ruled recount when things didn't look good for Bush. Bush had all his ducks in place for that one, from his brother and Katherine Harris is Florida, to the supervisor of elections in West Palm Beach (who was a lifelong Republican who changed her party affiliation for the sole purpose of running for supervisor in heavily democratic West Palm Beach. Remember the butterfly ballot? Her invention), to the neo-cons on the Supreme Court (including the husband of one of Bush's highest ranking campaign staffers, Mrs. Clarence Thomas. Talk about a conflict of interest that should have never existed. Don't think Scalia wasn't eyeing that Chief Justice position when Rhenquist kicked the bucket (boy his getting bypassed by John Roberts must have pissed him off). I'll give them credit for orchestrating THE greatest scam/scandal in the history of the world. Then we have the audacity to go into other countries and teach them how to have fair and legitimate elections.

By the way the bipartisan recount panel determined that if the entire state of Florida had been recounted then Gore would have won the election by the narrowist of margins. Unfortunately for America, but fortunately for Bush the study's findings were to be released in the fall of 2001 but were quashed after a little thing called 9/11. Not in the best interest of the country to release information that the Commander in Chief is a fraud in the face of such a crisis. I'm certainly no Gore fan but the man won the election.

I don't hate Bush but I sure as hell don't like him, not because I'm a Liberal but because I'm a Conservative. This man wouldn't know Conservative ideology if it jumped up and bit him in the ass. He's a puppet and the ultimate neo-con Dick Cheney is working the strings.

God what I would give for just one truly Conservative, socially progressive candidate for President. Hell, I'd be willing to start with a decent candidate for dog catcher.

So much for staying on topic... frown

[ January 19, 2006, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

We'll go right back on topic in a second, right after I simply state that the hatred toward Bush makes that against Clinton seem like a walk in the park. What Bush has had to endure from the Left and the widespread media, much of whom have attempted to literally damage this country, infinitely exceeds the crap thrown against Clinton. It is so sad.

Now. Back to Osama.

He's dead.

I would respectfully but totally disagree. The Republicans made Clinton's life hell over a blow job. The news media gave Bush a free ride in his first term, thanks to 9/11. I don't agree with the rabid hatred but I think America has a lot to be pissed at Bush about starting with the 2000+ body bags coming from Iraq. I find it almost laughable that with all the damage to America that Bush has done, domestically and internationally, you want to blame the news media for all of these troubles. I'm sorry bud but I have to go with fantomas on this one you are definitely a Bush apologist and a neo-con. I bet you believe that Fox News Channel is \"fair and balanced\" and Conservative. It is none of the three.

I hope you're right.

[ January 19, 2006, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

I never said I blamed the media for "these troubles." I blame the media for their true, deep-seeded hatred of Bush. They have gone so far as to literally make up stuff, report blatant inaccuracies, and put our troops in danger. This is totally unacceptable. Would they have done that if Clinton or a Democrat were president? Of course not.

Considering that 91% of the media people admitted that they voted for Clinton when he ran--91%! Jesus! No other voting "bloc" is that lopsided for a candidate--it's no surprise that there is so much anti-Bush bullshit going around. It is immensely more pronounced than when Clinton was president.

MIB, maybe the hatred against GWB stems from the fact that our economy is faultering, unless, of course, you consider minimum-wage service-sector jobs a success. Our deficit is at record levels, remember, there was NONE when GWB was appointed to the office, we are in a war that seemingly has no end, we have corruption of epic proportions in the White House, Congress, and probably the Senate too, we have an administration that doesn't like to disclose facts or even hold press conferences, we've seen hatred and fear become the two common emotions in this nation, and our standard of living continues to fall. These are just a few, off the top of my head. Feel free to add more. There are plenty. By the way, I am really beginning to wonder if Bush is somehow in cahoots with Bin Laden. Bin Laden seems to pop up at the most opportune moments for this administration. Give it time, MIB. You will see what a total fraud this administration is. I just hope it isn't too late.

[ January 19, 2006, 10:34 PM: Message edited by: millerbeach ]

I'm taking this non-topic discussion off the board and into private messages. Apologies to those that were enjoying the show.

[ January 19, 2006, 10:51 PM: Message edited by: UMRebel/Bucfan ]

Fact:

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

Huh? 11 consecutive quarters of economic growth? A GDP that has surpassed those before it? Record home construction and home sales? Personal income higher than it's been in some time? A stock market and NASDAQ at its highest since pre-9/11? All this DESPITE the high energy prices, the war, and the deficit. The American economy, the world's strongest, is doing phenomenally well. One can say it can always do better, but currently, it's cruising along very well.

You should get your facts right before you make such ridiculous claims.

BushCoInc has borrowed more from foreign countries than all 42 previous administrations combined; enjoy your booming economy and dont
worry about paying for anything!!

I'm enjoying it all right, especially Google's performance (today's downer in the Dow notwithstanding)! When they went public some 18 months ago or so at $85 per share, I had this big feeling they'd soon trade at enormous prices. So, I invested a bundle in them, buying a few thousand shares. I told everyone I knew to do the same. Only one friend listened to me. Even my father told me I was nuts and that the market wouldn't go up like that.

I sold almost all of my Google shares last week when they were over $410 per share.

I can't even imagine how superb the economy would be without a deficit, the war, and high energy prices.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MIB:
I'm enjoying it all right, especially Google's performance (today's downer in the Dow notwithstanding)! When they went public some 18 months ago or so at $85 per share, I had this big feeling they'd soon trade at enormous prices. So, I invested a bundle in them, buying a few thousand shares. I told everyone I knew to do the same. Only one friend listened to me. Even my father told me I was nuts and that the market wouldn't go up like that.

I sold almost all of my Google shares last week when they were over $410 per share.

I can't even imagine how superb the economy would be without a deficit, the war, and high energy prices. [/QUOTe
Hope you put all of your capital gains into a trust fund for the "kids". I can't remember, was i 2 boys or 2 girls or 1 of each?

The profit earned will help the right people, I assure you. Your concern is duly noted.