Link
Obama considering military strikes after Christmas Day aircraft plot - Times Online
Here we go again, Obama has to gather in all the intelligence then of course he will need the advice of Carter & Kerry, by the time he actually gets around to doing something it will probably be time to install his successor.
Those "3am" ads the Hillary campaign ran were so spot on.Here we go again, Obama has to gather in all the intelligence then of course he will need the advice of Carter & Kerry, by the time he actually gets around to doing something it will probably be time to install his successor.
Those "3am" ads the Hillary campaign ran were so spot on.
So...You're the president of the United States. A failed terrorist attempt just occurred. The government of the country in which the terrorist comes from is willing to work with you...It's 3 am. What do you do?
Link
Obama considering military strikes after Christmas Day aircraft plot - Times Online
Here we go again, Obama has to gather in all the intelligence then of course he will need the advice of Carter & Kerry, by the time he actually gets around to doing something it will probably be time to install his successor.
same reason richard reed was in the criminal system.If he's considering a "retaliatory" military strike against al Qaeda for what the bomber did . . .
Then what the hell is the bomber doing sitting in the criminal justice system?
Is it a criminal matter, or is it war?
go back to sleep.So...You're the president of the United States. A failed terrorist attempt just occurred. The government of the country in which the terrorist comes from is willing to work with you...It's 3 am. What do you do?
Perhaps GWB should have taken even more time than he did before deciding to attack IRAQ. After all, most of the 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. But I guess we can't attack SA, where the Bush clan has friends.....
Maybe he'll shoot a cruise missile into a tent.Link
Obama considering military strikes after Christmas Day aircraft plot - Times Online
Here we go again, Obama has to gather in all the intelligence then of course he will need the advice of Carter & Kerry, by the time he actually gets around to doing something it will probably be time to install his successor.
same reason richard reed was in the criminal system.
You DO recognize that this response doesnt actually answer the question, right?same reason richard reed was in the criminal system.
If he's considering a "retaliatory" military strike against al Qaeda for what the bomber did . . .
Then what the hell is the bomber doing sitting in the criminal justice system?
Is it a criminal matter, or is it war?
If he's considering a "retaliatory" military strike against al Qaeda for what the bomber did . . .
Then what the hell is the bomber doing sitting in the criminal justice system?
Is it a criminal matter, or is it war?
Where to even begin with this putrid pile of words...
First, Bush waited 2 years after 9/11 before doing anything with Iraq so its not like he woke up the night after and said "IRAQ!"
Second, the fact of where the 9/11 terrorists came from had anything to do with Iraq. After 9/11 the Bush Administrations statement was that they were going to aggressively persue states who sponsored terrorist action. Not specifically the terrorist action on 9/11, not specifically terrorist action by al-qaeda. Iraq qualified for this as there was history, both past and present, of Sadam financing and supporting terror not to mention the more spurious notions that there may've been contact with him and Al-Qaeda as well.
Third, just because the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi of birth doesn't mean we should've gone after Saudi Arabia. If 5 american born individuals immigrated into China, trained by the Chinese military, financed by the Chinese government, and then came back into America and set off some bombs should we go to war with the United States of America because those 5 happened to ethnically be American, or should we focus on the government that funded and supported them. Which, I should point out, IS what we did as the direct retaliation to 9/11. The DIRECT, immediete response was Afghanistan, not Iraq, whose government did directly have influence into the attack at hand. Iraq was less a direct sult of 9/11 and more a derivative of the War on Terror mantra and philosophy that grew out of that attack. So no, attacking Saudi Arabia simply because thats where these guys were born would've been asinine.
Fourth, the Saudi's are not simply Bush Clan Friends, they're American allies. We have very strong diplmoatic ties with Saudi Arabia and the government there is an ally in the War on Terror. While there are definitely portions of the Saudi population that are problematic the government, by and large, are far more diplomatically alligned to us and useful than say those of iraq, afghanistan, iran, etc. Not only would it have made no sense to retaliate against them simply because the people that did it were from there, but it would've made no sense from a political, diplomatic, and strategic angle as well.
So....was there a point to your post other than to try and bash Bush, rant about the war, and make incredibly inaccurate and factually flimsy comments? Cause I'm not seeing one.
No. There never is.So....was there a point to your post other than to try and bash Bush...?
Where to even begin with this putrid pile of words...
First, Bush waited 2 years after 9/11 before doing anything with Iraq so its not like he woke up the night after and said "IRAQ!"
Second, the fact of where the 9/11 terrorists came from had anything to do with Iraq. After 9/11 the Bush Administrations statement was that they were going to aggressively persue states who sponsored terrorist action. Not specifically the terrorist action on 9/11, not specifically terrorist action by al-qaeda. Iraq qualified for this as there was history, both past and present, of Sadam financing and supporting terror not to mention the more spurious notions that there may've been contact with him and Al-Qaeda as well.
Third, just because the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi of birth doesn't mean we should've gone after Saudi Arabia. If 5 american born individuals immigrated into China, trained by the Chinese military, financed by the Chinese government, and then came back into America and set off some bombs should we go to war with the United States of America because those 5 happened to ethnically be American, or should we focus on the government that funded and supported them. Which, I should point out, IS what we did as the direct retaliation to 9/11. The DIRECT, immediete response was Afghanistan, not Iraq, whose government did directly have influence into the attack at hand. Iraq was less a direct sult of 9/11 and more a derivative of the War on Terror mantra and philosophy that grew out of that attack. So no, attacking Saudi Arabia simply because thats where these guys were born would've been asinine.
Fourth, the Saudi's are not simply Bush Clan Friends, they're American allies. We have very strong diplmoatic ties with Saudi Arabia and the government there is an ally in the War on Terror. While there are definitely portions of the Saudi population that are problematic the government, by and large, are far more diplomatically alligned to us and useful than say those of iraq, afghanistan, iran, etc. Not only would it have made no sense to retaliate against them simply because the people that did it were from there, but it would've made no sense from a political, diplomatic, and strategic angle as well.
So....was there a point to your post other than to try and bash Bush, rant about the war, and make incredibly inaccurate and factually flimsy comments? Cause I'm not seeing one.
Those "3am" ads the Hillary campaign ran were so spot on.
Any that made the news?Some of this post can be used to rebuke a couple of the earlier posts regarding slow Obama.
Remember folks, Bush's decisions did not come immediately.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?