5/7/2005: Soldier comforts dying Iraqi girl

[busterb]

Wonder how many of the ones sharing their wisdom about the middle-east have been there?

[Troubleshooter]

I don't think that going to the Middle East is a requisite for understanding the situation on a basic level.

We know that the towers were knocked down. We had reliable, not infallible, as our gov't keeps reminding us in many differing ways, information as to who had done it. That sort of action should have been followed with a short, precise, and thorough action to capture and kill the person(s) responsible..

All of the rest we have been put through has been a waste and a sham.

[busterb]

Right, but perhaps it would help to understand the poor butt hole who's rideing the donkey, or camel, if he has the money to afford one.

[magilla]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

I don't think that going to the Middle East is a requisite for understanding the situation on a basic level.

We know that the towers were knocked down. We had reliable, not infallible, as our gov't keeps reminding us in many differing ways, information as to who had done it. That sort of action should have been followed with a short, precise, and thorough action to capture and kill the person(s) responsible..

All of the rest we have been put through has been a waste and a sham.

Do I understand you correctly, TS? It was clear from the very first that Saddam had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, but our current administration conflated the two until many people believed he did, and also believed that Saddam and Al Qaeda were working together. Now Osama and the Taliban are another story. I supported the attacks in Afghanistan completely. As far as I was concerned, the Taliban were accessories before and after the fact to an act of war, so let 'em lie in the bed they made. I am furious that Bush threw all the good that was accomplished in Afghanistan into the toilet, along with a book some count as holy.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by magilla

Do I understand you correctly, TS?

More to the point would be if someone attacks us, we take the time to find out who did it with a good degree of certainty and then bomb the shit out of them. End of campain.

If believable evidence shows anyone helped them, bomb them too.

By keeping things simple we maintain our credibility. Credibility is too valuable an asset to waste.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

Credibility is too valuable an asset to waste.

But you don't need credibity if you bomb EVERYONE.

[Troubleshooter]

"Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun."

Which movie you monkeys?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by magilla

Do I understand you correctly, TS? It was clear from the very first that Saddam had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, but our current administration conflated the two until many people believed he did, and also believed that Saddam and Al Qaeda were working together.

Nope. You could find a Dick Cheney quote in which he speculates that on Meet The Press once, but that's about it given the months-long runup to the war, they simply didn't say very much at all about any connection, never mind "conflated".