Osama bin Laden possibly surrounded

Al'Muktar said:
but what kura was saying was that he coulda stopped the war by taking out hitler first
which seems to say that kura thinks churchill was in power
move along :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
#1: I never said anything about Chruchill's position.

#2: My post was not serious. I was attempting to illustrate how flawed Riko's comment was. Riko claimed that the DoD could have averted 9/11 because its budget is so large and all that was required was a "$50 handgun." Obviously the DoD is not psychic, nor does it have anything to do with civilian airliners.

To illustrate my point, I made an analogy stating that Chrurchill could have averted WWII by shooting Hitler. In spite of not knowing what was going to happen and the fact that Churchill was in no position to do so.


I realize that something so blatantly obvious is difficult for somebody like you to grasp, but if you're having trouble following along, do yourself a favor and ask somebody to explain things to you so that you don't have to take up DB space and bandwidth.
 
when i want to warm up with some fresh, hot, steamy and reliable news i always head RIGHT over to the Peoples' Republic of China for a plate of Official headlines.

seriously, who knows, could be something. i doubt it.
 
i never said that.. but to clarify more clearly, i said/meant the dod commands a budget of 350bn which is meant to be for 'defense' yet it failed to do what a $50 pistol would have done if airlines were allowed to defend their own property.

and now the dod is getting even more money and doing even more provocative things abroad yet the outcome will be more terrorist attacks on larger and a more brutal scale.
 
riko said:
i never said that.. but to clarify more clearly, i said/meant the dod commands a budget of 350bn which is meant to be for 'defense' yet it failed to do what a $50 pistol would have done if airlines were allowed to defend their own property.
Click to expand...
The DoD has nothing to do with airline policy. As far as I know, there is absolutely no law that says that airline pilots can't be armed - that's up to the airline.

So the DoD did all it could in sending fighters up after the planes since that is all that it is in control of.

and now the dod is getting even more money and doing even more provocative things abroad yet the outcome will be more terrorist attacks on larger and a more brutal scale.
Click to expand...
The only way to stop terrorist attacks at this point is to give in to their demands. Which only validates terrorism as an acceptable avenue for bringing about political change.
 
RE airlines, they were never allowed to carry weapons on board, only such a thing has been considered until now (head of ffa said to that effect, what kind of bullshit bureacratic institution doesnt bother to 'think' about such things only until events have happened?)


RE demands:

and? the 'demands' are not so unreasonable considering the massive danger americans are being exposed to. lets not forget who the united states government is meant to represent, the american people.

bin ladens gripe is with american support of israel and troops in saudi..

the purpose of the government is to protect life liberty and the persuit of happiness, within the borders of america. exactly how is shoveling money to israel and having troops in saudi arabia fullfilling this requirement? its doing the exact opposite.

are you more interested in supporting a bunch of degenerates fighting over a spic of worthless land or making sure america is not dragged into a prolonged and costly 'war' that could be averted by ignoring the former?
 
riko said:
RE airlines, they were never allowed to carry weapons on board, only such a thing has been considered until now (head of ffa said to that effect, what kind of bullshit bureacratic institution doesnt bother to 'think' about such things only until events have happened?)
Click to expand...
But that has nothing to do with the DoD.


bin ladens gripe is with american support of israel and troops in saudi..
Click to expand...
And giving him what he want only legitimizes his actions.

are you more interested in supporting a bunch of degenerates fighting over a spic of worthless land or making sure america is not dragged into a prolonged and costly 'war' that could be averted by ignoring the former?
Click to expand...
I do not agree with the US' foreign policy, especially in regards to Israel.

However, I also don't believe in a policy of strict isolationism.

Israel is the biggest problem as far as terrorism is concerned. What I wish the government would do is force Israel to behave itself. Stop the stupid "settler" bullshit. Make them give back the land that they've taken. And so on and so forth. If they don't comply, withold support until they do.

Of course, this might spark terrorism on the behalf of Israel. I seem to recall several bomings on British hotels when the fate of Israel was up in the air.

I don't think that this is a situation that the US can win at this point. :shrug:
 
Yeah. In fact, WE should make Israel give back the land which they took.

Tomorrow.



With nukes.
 
MADness said:
According to the bit I read, the special forces infiltrated by foot and they wouldn't even use helicopters to insert them for fear of tipping off Osama.

When you hear about special forces WALKING into the middle of fucking nowhere in some psychotic manuever who comes to mind first?

Right.

The SAS. :)

It will be interesting to figure out what went on if this pans out.
Click to expand...




When you hear about anyone walking into any operation...it means you have been reading to many newsies.

No damned fool would allow his mission to be exposed.... especially if these guys were REALLY walking in to a fight, the chances of the mission going south would be great.

SO!...if you are reading about SAS guys walking into go get osama babblefish, you are reading fabricated News paper fiction.

They'll do reporting on it AFTER they are notified that the op was a success.

Unless the whole thing is disinformation..or it was leaked by some asshole.
 
ZooL said:
When you hear about anyone walking into any operation...it means you have been reading to many newsies.

No damned fool would allow his mission to be exposed.... especially if these guys were REALLY walking in to a fight, the chances of the mission going south would be great.

SO!...if you are reading about SAS guys walking into go get osama babblefish, you are reading fabricated News paper fiction.

They'll do reporting on it AFTER they are notified that the op was a success.

Unless the whole thing is disinformation..or it was leaked by some asshole.
Click to expand...

Why are you arguing? He said nothing about when it happened.
They probably did walk in since thats what we keep hearing and it probably happened a while ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top