It has nothing to do with attacking sovereign nations, because Bush has already done that very thing. And as far as going into that area in Pakistan that even Pakistani military wont go is BS because we could have gotten Bin Laden with a sniper and special forces.
2007-08-07 05:53:25 · 23 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Oofty...you know nothing about me...because if you did then you would know that "I" was in the military, active duty Army for 4 years.
2007-08-07 06:09:24 · update #1
Earnest, I am fully aware about what it would have entailed. By the way that you talk we wouldn't have special forces who actually blend into the rest of the region, but I know for a fact that we do. I also know that if Bush really wanted to get him, we already would have him.
If Bin Laden dies then the cause dies with him. Bush knows this.
2007-08-07 06:35:45 · update #2
Always the same...someone asks a very valid question, which SHOULD be asked by our media everyday, and they get ridiculed for it...1/2 of you criticse the very same media which is controlling you...turn your TV for one week and see if your thoughts have changed.
Bin Laden IS the enemy...on paper. Who is to say that following his little bedside visit from the CIA agent, he isn't safe and sound somewhere under US protection? If Bin Laden goes, he takes the 'sting' out of the purpose and that can never happen.
Here's one for you all that you have missed...Elite, special forces, EG Equavalent of the SAS, are trained to handle and live off ANY terrain, whether that be polar ice caps or not...ANY TERRAIN. Yes, the area between Pakistan & Afghanistan may be a pretty rugged one, but it would not deter these elite forces from finding him...he isn't a set of car keys...he is a very important human being if we are to believe the reports.
A Yugoslavian number 2 wanted for war crimes approx ten years ago was under armed guard with his very own elite forces. The British SAS went in and were out in 28 seconds whilst he was having a coffee...his own armed officers did not even get a shot off, nor did they catch ANY of the elite assassins...my point? He could have been taken out when he left hospital or at other times...don't think this is merely wishiful thinking becuase it is not...everyone is accessable at some point.
What Bush is REALLY saying by the statement is that he has bigger fish to fry and that the Bin Laden excuse has already served it's purpose...as daft as it sounds, Bin Laden has passed more laws in the US than any other terrorist I've ever heard of...
It's just very ironic that for such an important terrorist and organiser of 9/11, he is now not even wanted for questioning...considering he allegedly killed all those people on the day of 9/11, you would think that a 'quiet' word in his ear would be appropriate...especially for a country who has police forces going through hell to prosecute someone for even one murder...never mind thousands.
2007-08-07 10:32:30 · answer #1 · answered by lee h 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He said he wasn't really concerned with Bin Laden because it's alot bigger than Bin Laden . He dies , the movement continues . It would be great to get him , but there's oh so much more to this .
Re: Your comment on being a veteran . Thank you . I'm a vet too . But being a vet doesn't also make one a strategic military analyst . Some vets are , but most are not . And for me to explain to you the ultra-complicated situation and TERRAIN on the Afghanistan / Pakistan border are would take much too long , because I can tell from your assessment that you do not understand even the beginning . Sorry , but saying 'a sniper' could've gotten him is just the product of being wishful but uninformed on that topic .
2007-08-07 06:15:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Apparently it's only fair to blame Bush for things he isn't responsible for around here. Disturbing how he had no idea where Bin Laden could possibly be too.
2016-05-20 23:27:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
first let me thank you for serving this country. thank you and god bless.
as for bush, the reason he went to Iraq after saddam is because after the gulf war saddam had a sos put out on the first bush. the reason bush has not put any real effort in catching bin laden is because his family and the laden's are old friends. i guess that goes with the oil territory.
ignore people.
2007-08-07 06:31:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Saddam was the Dictator of Millions of Beaten down people.
Laden is to scared to be a terrorist but has many men killing for him. Laden would not be a problem if Clinton has handled things right. So don't blame Bush for everything.
2007-08-07 06:15:42 · answer #5 · answered by ♥ Mel 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
As long as bin laden leaves his millions to al qaeda I don't think his absence would ruin the organization.
2007-08-07 06:27:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
And if he was so easy to get why didn't Clinton get him?? He not only had him in his sight he actually met with him! He didn't think Saddam was worth bothering with either. Wrong blame on wrong person!! Had he been taken out when he should have maybe 9/11 never would have happened!!
2007-08-07 06:33:05 · answer #7 · answered by Brianne 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Bush talked about taking out Saddam Hussien before he was ever elected the first time. I guess nobody really took him seriously. It was one of his goals. Saddam tried to shoot down his family's plane while in the Middle East and he wanted to finish what his father started. His father had enough sense not to do it. I think OBL is dead.
2007-08-07 06:16:46 · answer #8 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Saddam was easy and Bush expected for the Iraqi people to welcome the US with open arms as liberators, but as usual Georgie didn't do his homework or listen to his ad visors, and it never happened!!! Bin Laden is hard and he's going to do everything in his power to convince us that we don't really need Bin Laden!!! We need to bounce Georgie out of office!!!
2007-08-07 06:02:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Because Saddam was an easy target and he was not related to the Saudi royal family. Bush diverted our military to take over Iraq for the oil, instead of pursuing Bin Laden. The reason he wants Bin Laden alive is that pursuing him would destabalize Afghanistan and Pakistan, which could bring down their governments and put nukes into the hands of radical fundamentalists.
2007-08-07 05:58:24 · answer #10 · answered by Big Momma Carnivore 5 · 2⤊ 7⤋