NationStates Jolt Archive

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

Are you talking about the stuff that just happened in the UK? Because I don't think it very likely that the entire security apparatus of the UK would fake a terrorist plot just to help the republicans out for the midterm elections.

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

Same. Threats always been their that they talk about, but now its a big deal cause so many want it to stay in power.

Are you talking about the stuff that just happened in the UK? Because I don't think it very likely that the entire security apparatus of the UK would fake a terrorist plot just to help the republicans out for the midterm elections.
OUr govts could be cracking it up to much higher than it should be.

No.

OUr govts could be cracking it up to much higher than it should be.

Eh, I think it is just more of a fortunate (or unfortunate) co-incidence this time. I mean, no doubt it's being played for all it is worth, but I don't think it is anything sinister. Not like that bogus subway bombing intelligence last year.

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."
Sure won't hurt the Repubs, same as the release of the movie WTC, that should also help the Repubs?

*passes out tin foil hats*

*passes out tin foil hats*
Right, because the administration has never fucked with the alert level for political gain in the past, huh? :rolleyes:

Right, because the administration has never fucked with the alert level for political gain in the past, huh? :rolleyes:

Not the alert level, just the implication that this terrorist attack was somehow too convient to happen when it did. That is why I'm passing out the tin foil hats.

hehe just like mass shooting when gun control laws are submitted for passage

:upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :headbang:

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

[Begin sarcasm module]

Ooooo! So you think that terrorists schedule their plots for the convenience of the Left and that therefore this couldn't possibly be a real plot because it would inconvenience the Democrats? Maybe you and Howard Dean should call the terrorists and complain! :p

[End sarcasm].

And has anybody else notice that bananas are almost 7% narrower than they were last year?

*eyes narrow* I smell conspiracy.

You stupid bastardly conspiracy smear artists. You have no evidence but your own bogus nonsense from the land of OZ. How gross. ( that was the polite version of what I wanted to express)

You stupid bastardly conspiracy smear artists. You have no evidence but your own bogus nonsense from the land of OZ. How gross. ( that was the polite version of what I wanted to express)

On the contrary! I have personally measured over 2000 bananas and I have the spreadsheets to prove it! :mad:

On the contrary! I have personally measured over 2000 bananas and I have the spreadsheets to prove it! :mad:

How did you get that Banana in here? We frisked you on the way in!

How did you get that Banana in here? We frisked you on the way in!

You don't wanna know. :p

Interesting? Hell, there's a thread somewhere where we were guessing the date that it would happen.

I wonder if I was close?? :p

Are you talking about the stuff that just happened in the UK? Because I don't think it very likely that the entire security apparatus of the UK would fake a terrorist plot just to help the republicans out for the midterm elections.


I think your right. But Blair is a bit too supportive of Bush isn't he!!!!???? Ya never know it could be a global governmental plot to prevent terrortists from completing their jobs. The terrorists' employers will then refuse to give them their xmas bonus. And tht terrorists will wander home sad, with all limbs in tact.

Right, because the administration has never fucked with the alert level for political gain in the past, huh? :rolleyes:
Surely not!!
http://img70.exs.cx/img70/9281/aproval_vs_alert_chart_NEW.gif

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

I thought about that too. Bush and Blair are more unpopular than they ever were, people seem to forget terrorism with the shit in the Middle East happening and suddenly there are raids, terrorist alarms etc.

OUr govts could be cracking it up to much higher than it should be.
Must defeat terrorists by giving up the very way of life they seek to destroy!

I think your right. But Blair is a bit too supportive of Bush isn't he!!!!???? Ya never know it could be a global governmental plot to prevent terrortists from completing their jobs. The terrorists' employers will then refuse to give them their xmas bonus. And tht terrorists will wander home sad, with all limbs in tact.
Or possibly it's actually a whole load of bullshit that's being used to gain support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now that people are war-wearier than ever, and it's a concoction of the various "intelligence" agencies to try and get us feeling more patriotic now that we're "under a threat" or whatever.

Something tells me we're never going to find out the truth on this one...

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

Sorry, the UK plot is not BS.

And Democrats are not "strong on terror". That's not to say that the Republicans are "excellent on terror", but at least they're trying.

Sorry, the UK plot is not BS.
THis is likely accurate, but you have to admit that the Bush administration hasn't been shy about using the terror alerts for political gain in the past, nor should it be surprising if they choose to do so between now and November.

And Democrats are not "strong on terror". That's not to say that the Republicans are "excellent on terror", but at least they're trying.
And the Democrats aren't trying? Spare me. The Democrats have been hobbled by the fact that they haven't been in power--it's not like they can force change on the current administration's policies, which have been, to say the least, disastrous. The best they can hope to do is stem the most egregious excesses of the Bush administration, and even then, the Bush administration has simply ignored or flaunted the will of the Congress on numerous occasions.

Face it, DK--even a do-nothing Congress would have done a better job on fighting "terror" than the Republicans have, because at least the do-nothings wouldn't have made the situation worse.

And the Democrats aren't trying? Spare me.

No Democrat would have done the NSA thing.

And it produced results in the Bali bombing without warrants.

Sorry!

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."
Makes sense. Terrorists stand to gain tremendously if the radical right wing remains in control of the US government, and the best way to help the right wing stay in power is to continue terror attacks.

And has anybody else notice that bananas are almost 7% narrower than they were last year?

*eyes narrow* I smell conspiracy.
I KNEW there was something suspicious going on! The terrorist alert is a plot to distract us from genetically altered bananas. :eek:

Lol, here in Aust I'm pretty sure bananas are noticeably smaller because a cyclone took out the banana crop.

I KNEW there was something suspicious going on! The terrorist alert is a plot to distract us from genetically altered bananas. :eek:

Lol, here in Aust I'm pretty sure bananas are noticeably smaller because a cyclone took out the banana crop.

Sure, that's what they tell you. But really, while everyone was sheltering from the weather, they went out and ruined the banana crop.

Sure, that's what they tell you. But really, while everyone was sheltering from the weather, they went out and ruined the banana crop.
The terrorists are targeting innocent Australian bananas? Bastards! Have they no human decency? :(

The terrorists are targeting innocent Australian bananas? Bastards! Have they no human decency? :(

Of course not. They're Reptillians. Duh.

Right, because the administration has never fucked with the alert level for political gain in the past, huh? :rolleyes:


Proof.

Proof.
Ridge doesn't come right out and say it was done for political gain (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-10-ridge-alerts_x.htm) but he does say that there were some awfully suspicious alert changes during the 2004 election season, situations where there was no real reason for the alert to go up and the administration overruled DHS to do it anyway.

Ridge doesn't come right out and say it was done for political gain (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-10-ridge-alerts_x.htm) but he does say that there were some awfully suspicious alert changes during the 2004 election season, situations where there was no real reason for the alert to go up and the administration overruled DHS to do it anyway.

Well, if you say that the UK plot to blow up US airliners is not BS, then there is plenty of reason to raise the threat level now.

Which dispenses with your hypothesis.

to recap:

1) tony blair might be george bush's bitch but NO he did not manufacture a bogus terrorist plot and arrest a couple dozen british citizens in order to get a better outcome for the republican party


2) yes the republican administration and congress will try to use this plot to scare the crap out of voters and keep congress republican. it hasnt worked well so far

3) it was very reasonable to raise the threat level for a few days given the seriousness of the plot and the numbers of people involved

4) the 911 commission recommended doing something about the possibility of liquid explosives on planes, this is giving the government an excuse to get those recommendations through

5) wont someone think of the bananas?

Well, if you say that the UK plot to blow up US airliners is not BS, then there is plenty of reason to raise the threat level now.

Which dispenses with your hypothesis.
SImply because there is one case where raising the threat level is warranted doesn't leave out the possibility that it'll be fucked with for partisan reasons in the future. What sort of stupid world do you live in where that's the case?

By the way, you might want to reread the thread--I've never suggested that this raising of the threat level was unwarranted. I've only noted that it has happened in the past and that it wouldn't be surprised if it happened again.

Not the alert level, just the implication that this terrorist attack was somehow too convient to happen when it did. That is why I'm passing out the tin foil hats.

There was no attack, noone was in imminent danger. Scotland Yard was surveiling them for a year. All legally by the way, warrants were issued and everything. The only reason the British struck now was because of US pressure, probably a reaction to the fear of losing control.

SImply because there is one case where raising the threat level is warranted doesn't leave out the possibility that it'll be fucked with for partisan reasons in the future. What sort of stupid world do you live in where that's the case?

By the way, you might want to reread the thread--I've never suggested that this raising of the threat level was unwarranted. I've only noted that it has happened in the past and that it wouldn't be surprised if it happened again.

Well, both sides are going to fuck with this for partisan reasons.

Well, both sides are going to fuck with this for partisan reasons.
There's no equivalence here--only one side has the power to raise or lower the alert level, and you fucking well know it.

to recap:

1) tony blair might be george bush's bitch but NO he did not manufacture a bogus terrorist plot and arrest a couple dozen british citizens in order to get a better outcome for the republican party
Not when he just failed to pass a new terrorist act in his parliament and is trying to garner support for his own political purpose. The republican bump is just icing on the cake.


2) yes the republican administration and congress will try to use this plot to scare the crap out of voters and keep congress republican. it hasnt worked well so far
It worked in 2004... Of course, they'll try again.

3) it was very reasonable to raise the threat level for a few days given the seriousness of the plot and the numbers of people involved
IF that wasn't a bogus threat for political purpose. It hasn't been ruled out yet.

5) wont someone think of the bananas?
They have their own Banana republic. What else is there to do?

Just felt contradictory this morning. :)

There's no equivalence here--only one side has the power to raise or lower the alert level, and you fucking well know it.
Oh, and the Democrats can't get on news programs and sling mud, I see.

Proof.
You really should learn to click the 'next page' thingy up the top and near the bottom before you post:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11548746&postcount=20

Oh, and the Democrats can't get on news programs and sling mud, I see.
Not even remotely the same, and any honest person knows that. Besides, have you watched the news programs lately? There's practically two Republican voices for one Democratic one, and that's assuming there's a Democrat there in the first place. Again--no equivalance.

Not even remotely the same, and any honest person knows that. Besides, have you watched the news programs lately? There's practically two Republican voices for one Democratic one, and that's assuming there's a Democrat there in the first place. Again--no equivalance.
Still watching Fox News, eh?

Still watching Fox News, eh?
Nope. Not watching any news--just reading it. Although when my girlfriend and I got satellite service last month, we chose a lower level of service simply because Fox News wasn't on it.

Even though you won't read it, Media Matters did a study on the issue of Republican versus Democratic politicians on the Sunday morning news shows, tracked every appearance for the last 10 years or so, and found that even during the Clinton administration, Republican voices far outweighed Democratic ones. They didn't even get into the question of liberal versus conservative, I believe, because that's far more subjective.

PS--and even if I were watching Fox News, that's completely beside the point. If you can't see that there's a fundamental difference between making statements on a tv news show and setting policy as regards alert levels, then you're a fucking moron. You are not a moron, however, so the other option is that you're dishonest.

Or possibly it's actually a whole load of bullshit that's being used to gain support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan now that people are war-wearier than ever, and it's a concoction of the various "intelligence" agencies to try and get us feeling more patriotic now that we're "under a threat" or whatever.

Something tells me we're never going to find out the truth on this one...

You right ,it has already been overused,or des/mis/informed by overdodis

You right ,it has already been overused,or des/mis/informed by overdodis

Then why is it still a big deal? Ask yourself that.

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

Does anyone else find it interesting that liberals deny that terrorists DO WANT TO KILL PEOPLE and assume that a terrorist threat is always political posturing?

Does anyone else find it interesting that liberals deny that terrorists DO WANT TO KILL PEOPLE and assume that a terrorist threat is always political posturing?
No, I don't find straw men interesting. But thanks for asking.

Eraclea']Then why is it still a big deal? Ask yourself that.
Contenmplate everything als a lie,getting my light tube to build a barricade and fight

There's no equivalence here--only one side has the power to raise or lower the alert level, and you fucking well know it.

One side can manipulate the alert level, and the other side can claim that everything the first side does is wrong without needing to have a plan of their own. THAT is the Democrat's advantage.

Makes sense. Terrorists stand to gain tremendously if the radical right wing remains in control of the US government, and the best way to help the right wing stay in power is to continue terror attacks.


Clearly the terrorists want to maintain the party in power that is most likely to use military force as the basis of their foreign policy and desparately want to keep any party that may wish to choose other options out of power.

Clearly the terrorists want to maintain the party in power that is most likely to use military force as the basis of their foreign policy and desparately want to keep any party that may wish to choose other options out of power.
Pretty much, yeah. Terrorism has grown and flourished with the current militaristic US regime in power. They can anticipate ever-growing numbers of new recruits, opportunities to take advantage of the power vaccuums created in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, and a rapidly shrinking threat from the US as our military becomes more over-extended with each passing day.

Here was an interesting article by Greg Palast about terror alert levels:


SO OSAMA WALKS INTO TO THIS BAR, SEE? (http://www.gregpalast.com/)
by Greg Palast
Monday August 14, 2006

So, Osama Walks into This Bar, See? and Bush says, "Whad'l'ya have, pardner?" and Osama says...

But wait a minute. I'd better shut my mouth. The sign here in the airport says, "Security is no joking matter." But if security's no joking matter, why does this guy dressed in a high-school marching band outfit tell me to dump my Frappuccino and take off my shoes? All I can say is, Thank the Lord the "shoe bomber" didn't carry Semtex in his underpants.

Today's a RED and ORANGE ALERT day. How odd. They just caught the British guys with the chemistry sets. But when these guys were about to blow up airliners, the USA was on YELLOW alert. That's a "lowered" threat notice.

According to the press office from the Department of Homeland Security, lowered-threat Yellow means that there were no special inspections of passengers or cargo. Isn't it nice of Mr. Bush to alert Osama when half our security forces are given the day off? Hmm. I asked an Israeli security expert why his nation doesn't use these pretty color codes.

He asked me if, when I woke up, I checked the day's terror color.

"I can't say I ever have. I mean, who would?"

He smiled. "The terrorists."

America is the only nation on the planet that kindly informs bombers, hijackers and berserkers the days on which they won't be monitored. You've got to get up pretty early in the morning to get a jump on George Bush's team.

There are three possible explanations for the Administration's publishing a good-day-for-bombing color guidebook.

1. God is on Osama's side.

2. George is on Osama's side.

3. Fear sells better than sex.

A gold star if you picked #3.


The Fear Factory

I'm going to tell you something which is straight-up heresy: America is not under attack by terrorists. There is no WAR on terror because, except for one day five years ago, al Qaeda has pretty much left us alone.

That's because Osama got what he wanted. There's no mystery about what Al Qaeda was after. Like everyone from the Girl Scouts to Bono, Osama put his wish on his web site. He had a single demand: "Crusaders out of the land of the two Holy Places." To translate: get US troops out of Saudi Arabia...



Do you agree that the Israelis are smart not to have terror alert levels because of the reason presented? I think that it is a pretty good point. WHy the hell would we want to let terrorists know which days we are stepping up security and which days we are not?

WHy the hell would we want to let terrorists know which days we are stepping up security and which days we are not?

Because its a whole lotta bovine excrement.

5) wont someone think of the bananas?

I do. Bananas are like kindred spirits to me. If I were a fruit, I'd want to be a banana. Sometimes I just...go bananas. :)

I do. Bananas are like kindred spirits to me. If I were a fruit, I'd want to be a banana. Sometimes I just...go bananas. :)
god (of fruit) bless you, lg. we need more compassionate men like you to make this world a better (tasting) place.

god (of fruit) bless you, lg. we need more compassionate men like you to make this world a better (tasting) place.Now if bananas weren't the most disgusting fruit since tomatoes, you'd have a point. :p

Anyone remember Bin Ladin's "warning" video during the 2004 campaign? The that was ostensibly urging Americans away from Shrub but was in fact calculated to mobilize the "Fuck You Sand ******" votes and keep Dear Leader in the Oval Office?

Terrorists know that Busheviks in power are good for business. Just the way Hezb'allah knew Israel going apeshit in Lebanon was great for theirs. Maybe it's not necessarily the governments playing with alert levels.

You stupid bastardly conspiracy smear artists. You have no evidence but your own bogus nonsense from the land of OZ. How gross. ( that was the polite version of what I wanted to express)
Please don't flame people. It is not nice.

Anyone remember Bin Ladin's "warning" video during the 2004 campaign? The that was ostensibly urging Americans away from Shrub but was in fact calculated to mobilize the "Fuck You Sand ******" votes and keep Dear Leader in the Oval Office?

Terrorists know that Busheviks in power are good for business. Just the way Hezb'allah knew Israel going apeshit in Lebanon was great for theirs. Maybe it's not necessarily the governments playing with alert levels.

Where do you get this flaming "Fuck You Sand ******" stuff from?

Now if bananas weren't the most disgusting fruit since tomatoes, you'd have a point. :p

:eek: BLASPHEMY! :eek:

*pelts you with squishy overripe bananas*

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

And yet another conspiracy theorist is born.

There was no attack, noone was in imminent danger. Scotland Yard was surveiling them for a year. All legally by the way, warrants were issued and everything. The only reason the British struck now was because of US pressure, probably a reaction to the fear of losing control.


Nope, sorry to disappoint, but the British struck due to the Pakistani government arresting one of the suspects who we were trailing. They arrested him knowing he was under surveilance and Pakistan ignored UK's wishes for him to be left for a bit longer. Once he was arrested UK police had to act quickly for fear of alerting those in the UK who were part of the plot.

Nope, sorry to disappoint, but the British struck due to the Pakistani government arresting one of the suspects who we were trailing. They arrested him knowing he was under surveilance and Pakistan ignored UK's wishes for him to be left for a bit longer. Once he was arrested UK police had to act quickly for fear of alerting those in the UK who were part of the plot.

Shhh.... You'll upset Kazus, who thinks that everything is Bush's fault...

Shhh.... You'll upset Kazus, who thinks that everything is Bush's fault...

well....in a roundabout kinda way.... ;)

Obviously Pakistan must be all about boosting the Republican's political chances too eh? Worldwide Bush conspiracy y'all! Terrorists are hatching plots near election (3months away is hardly that near) just to get Bush more votes too I suppose :p

well....in a roundabout kinda way.... ;)

Obviously Pakistan must be all about boosting the Republican's political chances too eh? Worldwide Bush conspiracy y'all! Terrorists are hatching plots near election (3months away is hardly that near) just to get Bush more votes too I suppose :p
Someone has already posted that Bin Laden did his message during the last election because he likes Bush.

I bet they believe that the only way Bin Laden will get killed will be if he goes hunting with his close friend, Dick Cheney.

Someone has already posted that Bin Laden did his message during the last election because he likes Bush.

I bet they believe that the only way Bin Laden will get killed will be if he goes hunting with his close friend, Dick Cheney.

Well y'all don't seem to have done a very good job of getting him so far.

Well y'all don't seem to have done a very good job of getting him so far.

It's cos he's hiding in the whitehouse and they're looking around the world!:D

Well y'all don't seem to have done a very good job of getting him so far.
No one wanted to do it my way, a wholesale thermonuclear bombing of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

That would have got him, but I'm sure there would be someone crying about the collateral damage.

So that's out.

No one wanted to do it my way, a wholesale thermonuclear bombing of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

That would have got him, but I'm sure there would be someone crying about the collateral damage.

So that's out.

This doesn't actually surprise me. I doubt that millions of innocent people would have died would bother you either. Would I be correct in that assumption?

Sure won't hurt the Repubs, same as the release of the movie WTC, that should also help the Repubs?
Of course, the fellow who made WTC is the most unlikely person to release his film for the benefit of the R's. I sincerely think that Oli Stone was trying to make a film to honor the two primary characters. Just my opinion though.

This doesn't actually surprise me. I doubt that millions of innocent people would have died would bother you either. Would I be correct in that assumption?

Here's "the skinny"...

1. let's say I'm in charge of the conservative government
2. If I get Bin Laden, no one can say I didn't get him.
3. If I don't get Bin Laden, the liberals will give me shit.

I guarantee that other terrorists would think twice about attacking the US after such an extreme reaction.

I might have done it this way:

The Mongol method:

1. Ask the Taliban politely for Bin Laden, and tell them that if I don't have him within 6 hours, Afghanistan will cease to exist.

2. See what they do.

No one would be fucking with the US after that.

Here's "the skinny"...

1. let's say I'm in charge of the conservative government
2. If I get Bin Laden, no one can say I didn't get him.
3. If I don't get Bin Laden, the liberals will give me shit.

I guarantee that other terrorists would think twice about attacking the US after such an extreme reaction.

I might have done it this way:

The Mongol method:

1. Ask the Taliban politely for Bin Laden, and tell them that if I don't have him within 6 hours, Afghanistan will cease to exist.

2. See what they do.

No one would be fucking with the US after that.

And what if they had called your bluff? Millions of innocent people would be dead, millions more would die decades from now as a result of radiation poisoning, the US would be the most hated country in the world. And for what, exactly?

The possible death of one man whose death probably would not have even stopped the terrorist attacks, and combined with the mass-chaos and death of the nuclear strikes would probably have created hundreds of thousands more martyrs for the cause.

What would you do then? Nuke every country that had a Muslim uprising or terrorist group in it? Some countries can actually fight back, you know.

the US would be the most hated country in the world. And for what, exactly?
Many assert that we're already there. We might as well be effective if we're going to be cursed if we do something, and cursed if we don't.

The possible death of one man whose death probably would not have even stopped the terrorist attacks, and combined with the mass-chaos and death of the nuclear strikes would probably have created hundreds of thousands more martyrs for the cause.
Official poop from the Democrats here is that if we caught Bin Laden or killed him instead of fucking around, this all would be over. How many times did I hear that? Even now? Sorry. Also, airburst nuclear weapons have little downrange fallout worth worrying about - we've detonated hundreds already in our atmosphere, and for some reason, the number of excess cancer deaths isn't even approaching 1/10th of what was calculated. In terms of overall US deaths, a good exchange over time.

What would you do then? Nuke every country that had a Muslim uprising or terrorist group in it? Some countries can actually fight back, you know. Any Islamic ruled nation, yes. How would an Islamic nation struck by 128 warheads from a Trident submarine a few hundred miles off the coast "fight back"? They would have at most, 8 minutes of warning, and that would be if they had the right kind of radar warning system. After that, there wouldn't be anything alive in the entire country.

No one wanted to do it my way, a wholesale thermonuclear bombing of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

That would have got him, but I'm sure there would be someone crying about the collateral damage.

So that's out.


You know I read about this thing the Russians did to terroists in Chechnyia, one terroist group abducted some Russian political figure, So the Russians arrested these terrroists family members, and let them know, then started sending the terrorist fingers, toes, and other pieces of his families bodies. They caught on real quick and let the Political figure go, why didn't we do that with Bin Ladens family? Why did we just let them leave?

You know I read about this thing the Russians did to terroists in Chechnyia, one terroist group abducted some Russian political figure, So the Russians arrested these terrroists family members, and let them know, then started sending the terrorist fingers, toes, and other pieces of his families bodies. They caught on real quick and let the Political figure go, why didn't we do that with Bin Ladens family? Why did we just let them leave?
I'm not sure if that would have worked on Bin Laden. I'm also not sure that the Chechens have all embraced suicide bombing to the extent that the Wahhabi have.

Nope, sorry to disappoint, but the British struck due to the Pakistani government arresting one of the suspects who we were trailing. They arrested him knowing he was under surveilance and Pakistan ignored UK's wishes for him to be left for a bit longer. Once he was arrested UK police had to act quickly for fear of alerting those in the UK who were part of the plot.NBC reported that the US pressured Pakistan to make the arrest earlier than the British wanted the arrest made, ostensibly because they were afraid the suspect would get away. The British were pretty confident they had it all in hand, but the US apparently had a little more stroke with the Pakistani government, so the arrest went forward, which caused the British to move a little earlier than they hoped to originally.

Does it matter? Republican, Democrat, all the same really.

No one wanted to do it my way, a wholesale thermonuclear bombing of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

That would have got him, but I'm sure there would be someone crying about the collateral damage.

So that's out.
You know, DK - there're times that you're so full of shit it's a wonder you can afford the time away from the bog just to type out this nonsense.

This is indeed one of those times.

NBC reported that the US pressured Pakistan to make the arrest earlier than the British wanted the arrest made, ostensibly because they were afraid the suspect would get away. The British were pretty confident they had it all in hand, but the US apparently had a little more stroke with the Pakistani government, so the arrest went forward, which caused the British to move a little earlier than they hoped to originally.

Be fair. The Brits only wanted to run it for an extra week. It's not like it would have significantly altered the timing for the election cycle.

The US wanted it stopped before any dry runs apparently.

I think the Brits were right about gathering more evidence tho'.

Be fair. The Brits only wanted to run it for an extra week. It's not like it would have significantly altered the timing for the election cycle.

The US wanted it stopped before any dry runs apparently.

I think the Brits were right about gathering more evidence tho'.
I'm not suggesting that the US significantly screwed the operation, certainly not like last year when they forced an early arrest that meant the British didn't capture some of the people behind the Metro bombings, but they did force the British's hands, and seemingly gained nothing for it.

NBC reported that the US pressured Pakistan to make the arrest earlier than the British wanted the arrest made, ostensibly because they were afraid the suspect would get away. The British were pretty confident they had it all in hand, but the US apparently had a little more stroke with the Pakistani government, so the arrest went forward, which caused the British to move a little earlier than they hoped to originally.

I didn't hear that one. So it was Bushes fault after all!:p

I'm not suggesting that the US significantly screwed the operation, certainly not like last year when they forced an early arrest that meant the British didn't capture some of the people behind the Metro bombings, but they did force the British's hands, and seemingly gained nothing for it.

Well certainly. John Reid seems quite content to do that on his own. Caution Daily Mail article! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=400305&in_page_id=1770)

Personally, I think the US should have deferred to the Brits. It was really their bag with ISI and pakistan anyway. I just don't think that US pressure in this case was motivated by election politics because it wouldn't have made any difference anyway.

Well certainly. John Reid seems quite content to do that on his own. Caution Daily Mail article! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=400305&in_page_id=1770)

Personally, I think the US should have deferred to the Brits. It was really their bag with ISI and pakistan anyway. I just don't think that US pressure in this case was motivated by election politics because it wouldn't have made any difference anyway.
Yeah, I think it's a bit of a stretch to argue that they'd go to all this trouble to try to affect a Democratic primary in a state where they have next to no chance of picking up a seat.

Yeah, I think it's a bit of a stretch to argue that they'd go to all this trouble to try to affect a Democratic primary in a state where they have next to no chance of picking up a seat.

Yeah. I don't think Lieberman's problems really figure all that much into republican strategy. I think it's more news because its unusual for a sitting senator to lose a primary than anything. Also, the raids happened after lieberman had already lost anyway.

I could buy the idea of a bogus terror plot if it was like the threats on the NYC subway last year, or the arrest of those clearly deluded but angry people in florida, but for this to be come type of conspiracy would involve just too many foreign entities that probably have very little reason to care one way or the other.

while i dont buy into the conspiracy, it does appear the CIA put pressure on MI5 to act earlier than they wanted to in breaking up this 'plot', which by the way so far seems entirely based on plotting in internet chat rooms. as yet, 6 days later, no explosives, no explosive making equipment, no links to any groups, no funding patterns etc.

the question is did the yanks make the brits foil a very embryonic plan and consequently create havoc in airports tactically too early for whatever reason?

while i dont buy into the conspiracy, it does appear the CIA put pressure on MI5 to act earlier than they wanted to in breaking up this 'plot', which by the way so far seems entirely based on plotting in internet chat rooms. as yet, 6 days later, no explosives, no explosive making equipment, no links to any groups, no funding patterns etc.

the question is did the yanks make the brits foil a very embryonic plan and consequently create havoc in airports tactically too early for whatever reason?

and it seems there are passport issues as well....

Pretty much, yeah. Terrorism has grown and flourished with the current militaristic US regime in power. They can anticipate ever-growing numbers of new recruits, opportunities to take advantage of the power vaccuums created in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, and a rapidly shrinking threat from the US as our military becomes more over-extended with each passing day.


Really?
You consider that rational?

So these terrorists DON'T want the US to pull out of their countries? They prefer a US regime that will stay or become more involved so that they can recruit more terrorists that can try and not make the US leave?

I'm not trying to say that terrorists actually WANT Democrats to be in power because quite frankly, I doubt they can really tell the difference and indiscriminately hate America no matter who is in charge but to think that they actually wantthe opposite of they quite vocally are saying seems like it comes from the tin foil hat brigade.

Really?
You consider that rational?

So these terrorists DON'T want the US to pull out of their countries? They prefer a US regime that will stay or become more involved so that they can recruit more terrorists that can try and not make the US leave?

Look at current events as proof. Hezb'allah was in decline until Israel went apeshit in Lebanon. Now thanks to the bombings and invasions, Hezb'allah is back in popular demand for a long time.

Terrorists need an excuse to keep running on. When you want to keep a terrorist organization running, rebels without a cause are bad things.

I'm not trying to say that terrorists actually WANT Democrats to be in power because quite frankly, I doubt they can really tell the difference and indiscriminately hate America no matter who is in charge but to think that they actually wantthe opposite of they quite vocally are saying seems like it comes from the tin foil hat brigade.

Bin Ladin's video message to America during 2004 was not meant to turn people to the Democratic Party despite what he claimed on it. It was a brilliantly calculated ploy to use the Real American's™ patriotism against him. Whoever didn't already regard Bin Ladin with a pretty much racial Islamophobic contempt and go against his suggestions that voting Bush would be a bad idea would probably be a weak-willed and spineless sheep who doesn't want to come off looking like he or she agrees with Bin Ladin.

And as 2004 shows, that worked spectacularly. Dear Leader is still running the country into the ground, and Bin Ladin is still relevant in the Middle East up until Olmert pulled a Bush into Lebanon and Hezb'allah jumped into the spotlight.

Look at current events as proof. Hezb'allah was in decline until Israel went apeshit in Lebanon. Now thanks to the bombings and invasions, Hezb'allah is back in popular demand for a long time.

Terrorists need an excuse to keep running on. When you want to keep a terrorist organization running, rebels without a cause are bad things.


What is that 'proof' of?
Hezballah WANTS Israel to attack Lebanon and destroy their infrastructure and root out their bases and destroy their weapons?
And their mastermind goal is to get more members? more press? To what end?


Bin Ladin's video message to America during 2004 was not meant to turn people to the Democratic Party despite what he claimed on it. It was a brilliantly calculated ploy to use the Real American's™ patriotism against him. Whoever didn't already regard Bin Ladin with a pretty much racial Islamophobic contempt and go against his suggestions that voting Bush would be a bad idea would probably be a weak-willed and spineless sheep who doesn't want to come off looking like he or she agrees with Bin Ladin.

And as 2004 shows, that worked spectacularly. Dear Leader is still running the country into the ground, and Bin Ladin is still relevant in the Middle East up until Olmert pulled a Bush into Lebanon and Hezb'allah jumped into the spotlight.

Bin Laden's grand plan is to help Dubya stay in power so that more of the greatest military might the world has ever known will focus on killing him and smacking down anyone that supports or thinks like Bin Laden?
And this is all just some big publicity stunt then?

Wow.
It takes a special person to make that work in one's head.

The Premise of this thread is absurd. An evil accusation without evidence and merit made for political purposes coming from the side that believes that terrorism is of no threat to national security. The side of cut and run. The side of run away and hope they won't hurt us. Stateless Islamic fascist terrorists are a threat as never before.

The Premise of this thread is absurd. An evil accusation without evidence and merit made for political purposes coming from the side that believes that terrorism is of no threat to national security. The side of cut and run. The side of run away and hope they won't hurt us. Stateless Islamic fascist terrorists are a threat as never before.
Could you possibly have fit more bullshit into a single post? Could you have slandered half the US more than you did in this post? I have my doubts. Your namesake would vomit if he saw what you are doing to his name and reputation.

Could you possibly have fit more bullshit into a single post? Could you have slandered half the US more than you did in this post? I have my doubts. Your namesake would vomit if he saw what you are doing to his name and reputation.


Well you used a curse word. You accused me of slander and than through in another insult for good measure. No facts. No arguments. No logic. No history. No philosophy. No ideology. Just hate and mean comments. Meet the neo-libs. If you have some evidence that the basis of this thread's accusation is accurate...present it. If you have none, keep the sort of bile from your last post in check.

Well you used a curse word. You accused me of slander and than through in another insult for good measure. No facts. No arguments. No logic. No history. No philosophy. No ideology. Just hate and mean comments. Meet the neo-libs. If you have some evidence that the basis of this thread's accusation is accurate...present it. If you have none, keep the sort of bile from your last post in check.

I'll bet dollars to donuts he's not a neo-liberal.

I'll bet dollars to donuts he's not a neo-liberal.
You are right. He is just a mean person. I see no reason for it. He has yet to put forth an argument of any kind.

Well you used a curse word. You accused me of slander and than through in another insult for good measure. No facts. No arguments. No logic. No history. No philosophy. No ideology. Just hate and mean comments. Meet the neo-libs. If you have some evidence that the basis of this thread's accusation is accurate...present it. If you have none, keep the sort of bile from your last post in check.
Ooooooh. I used a curse word. Go run and tell your mommy. :rolleyes:

And if you read the thread, you'll notice that I've backed up my limited claims more than once. The fact that you have difficulty in rudimentary reading comprehension and getting past your painfully obvious blinders is hardly my problem.

You are right. He is just a mean person. I see no reason for it. He has yet to put forth an argument of any kind.

Actually, the point was you should probably go and look up what neoliberalism is before you go bandying it about.

Ooooooh. I used a curse word. Go run and tell your mommy. :rolleyes:

And if you read the thread, you'll notice that I've backed up my limited claims more than once. The fact that you have difficulty in rudimentary reading comprehension and getting past your painfully obvious blinders is hardly my problem.
Here comes more petty insults. There is no evidence of any kind that the American and British governments played any role in this plot other than to foil it with enormous success. They should be congratulated by you.

Nobody seems to remember September 11, 2001. The left seems to have wanted Bush out of power more than Saddam Hussein. And according to a recent poll only 6% of democrats believe that terrorism is the most important issue today. DURING A WAR ON TERROR. That is like having 6% of Republicans say that world war II is the biggest issue during world war II.

Islamic fascist terrorists are a threat as never before.
Is this an admission that after spending over $300 Billion on the war in Iraq, after the deaths of over 2600 US troops in Iraq, after the deaths of tens of thousand innocent Iraqis, after a huge increase in the number of terrorist attacks since the invasion of Iraq, that the war on terror is actually getting worse not better?

Mission Accomplished huh?

Is this an admission that after spending over $300 Billion on the war in Iraq, after the deaths of over 2600 US troops in Iraq, after the deaths of tens of thousand innocent Iraqis, after a huge increase in the number of terrorist attacks since the invasion of Iraq, that the war on terror is actually getting worse not better?

Mission Accomplished huh?

Yes it is. Some missions are accompished and others are not. But it is getting worse. And when the heat is on and the fight is tough, some stay and some run home to piss their pants. You can guess what I want my country to do.

Yes it is. Some missions are accompished and others are not. But it is getting worse. And when the heat is on and the fight is tough, some stay and some run home to piss their pants. You can guess what I want my country to do.
Well, if it is getting worse, and you want your country to "stay the course", then perhaps you should stop what you are doing, sign up, and put your money where your mouth is?

Nobody seems to remember September 11, 2001. The left seems to have wanted Bush out of power more than Saddam Hussein. And according to a recent poll only 6% of democrats believe that terrorism is the most important issue today. DURING A WAR ON TERROR. That is like having 6% of Republicans say that world war II is the biggest issue during world war II.
When the US invaded Afghanistan, Bush was at the height of his popularity. Then for some reason, he opted to abandon the War on Terror, and begin the War of Errors, by invading Iraq. Iraq was certainly no threat to the US. Since the War of Errors began, Bush's popularity has plummeted and rightly so. Why blame the left for Bush's incompetence?

Well, if it is getting worse, and you want your country to "stay the course", then perhaps you should stop what you are doing, sign up, and put your money where your mouth is?

I do not want us to stay the course. I want to escalate and put more troops in. I am not eligible for military service due to a severe medical condition.

When the US invaded Afghanistan, Bush was at the height of his popularity. Then for some reason, he opted to abandon the War on Terror, and begin the War of Errors, by invading Iraq. Iraq was certainly no threat to the US. Since the War of Errors began, Bush's popularity has plummeted and rightly so. Why blame the left for Bush's incompetence?

First of all, we had about 10 reasons to invade Iraq....
1) broken UN resolutions
2) possession of banned weapons
3) harboring of WMD's
4) the UN's failure to act on its promises
5) the broken 1991 ceasefire
6) Iraq's links to international terrorism
7) attacks on American aircraft by Iraq
8) the human rights violations of Iraq
9) the threat of Iraq to Israel
10) the threat of Iraq to the world oil supply

Now that we have defeated Iraq we have installed a new democracy very quickly will low casualties. We are aiding our allie Iraq in its fight against terrorists. The same ones that attacked us on 911. President Bush's popularity is not relavent to this thread or discussion in any way.

I do not want us to stay the course. I want to escalate and put more troops in. I am not eligible for military service due to a severe medical condition.Lovely. Why am I not surprised.

Lovely. Why am I not surprised.

It is not relavent. I like how you are evading the point of the thread. This dumb baseless indefensible conspiracy theory.

Lovely. Why am I not surprised.
My exact sentiments.

The left goes on a personal attack and ignores the right's attack on the very basic premise of the indefensible thread. Typical forum experience.

What is that 'proof' of?
Hezballah WANTS Israel to attack Lebanon and destroy their infrastructure and root out their bases and destroy their weapons?
And their mastermind goal is to get more members? more press? To what end?

You're either myopic enough to be Mr. Magoo, or a disingenuous tool. Either way I'll try to explain these to you in a matter you can understand.

Hezb'allah likes it when Israel attacks Lebanon because Hezb'allah was made to push Israel out of an occupied Lebanon and they can tell the Lebanese that big bad Israel is the reason they need to have Hezb'allah around.

With Israel and Syria out of Lebanon, Hezb'allah was starting to feel irrevelant in Lebanon and needed something that would give them an excuse to stick around stir more shit. They kidnap a couple of Israeli soldiers in hopes of a hostage exchange but also to hope Israel does something stupid that'll convince the Lebanese people that they still need Hezb'allah.

What happens? Olmert pulls a Bush and starts going apeshit in Lebanon, blowing the shit out of people who had nothing to do with Hezb'allah whatsoever. Not only that, they blow the economy and infratructure to shit to where the Lebanese are going to end up being dirt poor and pissed off Islamists, just like the Palestinians. Which is good for Hezb'allah, because they can point the finger at Israel and America and say "See? They hate Muslims like you and me. Come and join us and we'll kick their asses off our lands."

And Hezb'allah creamed in their pants. Even more so when Israel declared they didn't do as much as they hoped to do and probably lost the war.

Bin Laden's grand plan is to help Dubya stay in power so that more of the greatest military might the world has ever known will focus on killing him and smacking down anyone that supports or thinks like Bin Laden?
And this is all just some big publicity stunt then?

Wow.
It takes a special person to make that work in one's head.

Actually it takes someone who makes Forrest Gump look like Einstein to not figure out how Bush in office is good for Bin Ladin's business.

Shrub does stupid things like take focus away from Afghanistan and splits the US military presence in the Middle East to invade Iraq and show Daddy he could "finish the job" with "Mission Accomplished." Iraq was run by a bad, bad man named Saddam Hussein, but Saddam used to be one of Uncle Sam's bitches until he fell for the "It's okay to invade Kuwait" lie that was fed to him. But he kept away insane Jihadist kooks like Bin Ladin out of his oppressive country. When Shrub invades Iraq and overthrows Saddam and disbands the Iraqi infrastructure, there's nothing standing in the way to keep control of the mess that results and lets all those crazy Islamists who had been kept out of Iraq before to come in and start shit. And since Shrub also wants to "make Iraq a democracy" after he couldn't find the WMDs- Waldo has them inside his cap- and payed only half-ass attention to Afghanistan, that gave the kooks in the Taliban a real chance to make a comeback.

Top the mess in Iraq and Afghanistan that Shrub left, along with all these little whoopsies like Abu Ghraib and Haditha, and Bin Ladin has a field day of free commercials where he can tell those angry Muslims that America is pissing on them and wants them dead because they're sucking Israel's cock, and you get those angry Muslims joining up terrorist groups like Al Qaeda.

And the more you kill, the more join in and kill American troops. If you think that's bullshit, try wrestling a colony of army ants naked to get the point.

It is not relavent. I like how you are evading the point of the thread. This dumb baseless indefensible conspiracy theory.No, I've noticed that some of the loudest war hawks aren't and won't be in the military. I have less good reasons to dislike that sort of behavior as Wallonochia, as I'm also ineligible for military service (not to my chagrin, Germany still has a draft afterall), but it remains contemptible none-the-less.

The left goes on a personal attack and ignores the right's attack on the very basic premise of the indefensible thread. Typical forum experience.One rightwinger proclaims himself the sole speaker for his cause and his debate opponents the sole speakers for the left and proceeds to claim victimhood. He is mistaken. Typical forum experience.

First of all, we had about 10 reasons to invade Iraq....
1) broken UN resolutions
2) possession of banned weapons
3) harboring of WMD's
4) the UN's failure to act on its promises
5) the broken 1991 ceasefire
6) Iraq's links to international terrorism
7) attacks on American aircraft by Iraq
8) the human rights violations of Iraq
9) the threat of Iraq to Israel
10) the threat of Iraq to the world oil supply



Now that we have defeated Iraq we have installed a new democracy very quickly will low casualties. We are aiding our allie Iraq in its fight against terrorists. The same ones that attacked us on 911. President Bush's popularity is not relavent to this thread or discussion in any way.


1.You mean Resolution 1441, the one that they ultimately complied to?
2. Wow..you mean you found them? No one else has.
3. Amazing....kinda weird that your the only one who found em!
4. Thats Iraq's fault, how?
5. Uh..didnt we invade them?
6. Oh you mean the ones that didnt exist in Iraq, until AFTER we invaded.
7. Yah, they shot a few sam's at american planes in the "no-fly" zone a few times, years before. We didnt invade then.
8. Funny...we didnt invade China. or Rwanda in 1994. Are you sure thats not just a straw man, mr Goldwater?
9. Wich since there was no WMD's of any kind...kinda makes that null anmd void, really.
10. You mean the oil underneath its own soil, that it claims soverrignity over?
Or do you feel that the oil belongs to us by right of virtue?


Keep the lame, tired exscuses coming.

Today's lessons on irony comes courtesy of Barrygoldwater:
Well you used a curse word. You accused me of slander and than through in another insult for good measure. No facts. No arguments. No logic. No history. No philosophy. No ideology. Just hate and mean comments. Meet the neo-libs. If you have some evidence that the basis of this thread's accusation is accurate...present it. If you have none, keep the sort of bile from your last post in check.
see those bolded parts? They are what Barrygoldwater think is bad form in a debate. And yet here is what his previous post looked like:
The Premise of this thread is absurd. An evil accusation without evidence and merit made for political purposes coming from the side that believes that terrorism is of no threat to national security. The side of cut and run. The side of run away and hope they won't hurt us. Stateless Islamic fascist terrorists are a threat as never before.
Notice the "No facts. No arguments. No logic. No history. No philosophy. (...)" in Barrygoldwater's own post?

So I suggest that you, boys and girls, don't do like Barrygoldwater and actually do as you would have done unto you. When you claim say something like "If you have some evidence that the basis of this thread's accusation is accurate...present it. If you have none, keep the sort of bile from your last post in check." you have better have brought some kind of evidence of your own and kept your own bile in check or you will surely be called hypocrite and will be laughed out of the debate.

One other thing, Barrygoldwater: your claims of slander would have been accurate if The Nazz's post would not have been so dead on the money. You were the one who slandered half the United States (the liberals), not to mention law-abiding muslim the world over.

In conclusion, get over yourself and don't be surprised if you get responded in kind when you spew hatred messages like Barrygoldwater did. Thank you.

Class dismissed.

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."I can't say that the threat itself was a Republican plot...the fact that the day it happened it was all the 24-hour "news" stations could talk about, on the other hand...

10) the threat of Iraq to the world oil supply.

Iraq was actually a very reliable oil supplier. If we had removed the sanctions, Iraqi oil production could have recovered to its 1991 levels or even higher without having to invade the country. Saddam was contained; it would have been better to allow his secular dictatorship exist as a bulwark against Iran and keep his oil flowing and economy growing than to invade and replace it with a government that can barely control its capital let alone the rest of the country.

...all of a sudden there is a terrorist threat less than 90 days before midterm elections when many Republicans are facing possible defeat? Hopefully Americans will realize the BS and not think: "Republicans, strong on terror."

Actually, they planned it so it is less than 820 days before the 2008 Presidential election so it'd be fresh in everyone's mind. :rolleyes:

*sniff* Ah, I do love a conspiaracy theory. C'mon now. You really think that 90 days is close enough to make a difference?!? Hardly. So save it for the 18 October terrorist newstory, eh? :D

Iraq was actually a very reliable oil supplier. If we had removed the sanctions, Iraqi oil production could have recovered to its 1991 levels or even higher without having to invade the country. Saddam was contained; it would have been better to allow his secular dictatorship exist as a bulwark against Iran and keep his oil flowing and economy growing than to invade and replace it with a government that can barely control its capital let alone the rest of the country.
What can I say? I have to agree with everything in this post!! :)

Iraq was actually a very reliable oil supplier. If we had removed the sanctions, Iraqi oil production could have recovered to its 1991 levels or even higher without having to invade the country. Saddam was contained; it would have been better to allow his secular dictatorship exist as a bulwark against Iran and keep his oil flowing and economy growing than to invade and replace it with a government that can barely control its capital let alone the rest of the country.


Unpossible.
America went there to get the oil.
It was blood for oil.
Remember? Everyone had a sign letting us know it was blood for oil.

No

:D Does anybody find it interesting that the left wing drags out their conspiracy theories whenever it is the summer of an even numbered year? I am still waiting for us to steal all the oil and get a military draft.

*snip*
I already said "no"

Does anyone else find it interesting that the Democrats want to be percieved as strong on terrorism when their stratagy is one of retreat?

Does anyone at all find it interesting that Barrygoldwater is running around spouting vast left-wing conspiracy rants every chance he gets?

Didn't think so either.

:D Does anybody find it interesting that the left wing drags out their conspiracy theories whenever it is the summer of an even numbered year? I am still waiting for us to steal all the oil and get a military draft.

The way I look at it is simple: If they're already looking for excuses for having lost the election even before the election is held then they're doomed to lose the election. :)

Does anyone at all find it interesting that Barrygoldwater is running around spouting vast left-wing conspiracy rants every chance he gets?

Didn't think so either.

Conspiracy? I accused nobody of conspiracy. I accused those on the left of accusing others of it.