Report: Bush OK'd secret raids inside Pakistan

Dan,
Shouldn't this have been the main objective to begin with and NOT Iraq?

Semperfiguy, hadenough is a RonPaulodyte. Just ignore him and he will go away.
Camacho-both were correct targets in the war on terror. Remember, Germany did not attack us in WWII, but we went after them anyway. Iraq was a festering brood of America hating zealots with, thanks to the corrupt UN, unlimited resources to use against us.

The issue and topic is AFGHANISTAN. If raids into Pakistan will spur them to really do something about finding bin Ladin, go for it George. They have millions in financial aid to lose. We could just keep the money and turn our back on the whole mess that is the middle east and just wait for the smoke to clear.
Personally, I'd prefer to level the entire region. I would level Bagdad, too. Maybe, I would warn them before I did. Maybe. If ruthlessness is the name of their game give them ruthlessness and be done with it.

I can empathize with Bush's dilemma....as president of my fraternity, I once ordered a panty raid on a soroity house.....

Finally.

They take our money and then they tell us that we can't fight terrorists in their country because the people are supportive of the terrorists and might remove the president. They removed him anyway, and they're still taking our money. Bush finally wakes up and decides to go after the actual terrorists. We all want Bin Laden's head on a stick- Republican and Democrat alike. Get the bastard and mow down his horde. Us wimpy liberals are with you on this one.

Is this the same Pakistan that Obama has threatened to invade during his debates with Hillary?

Yes it is, Roy. I never thought I'd say this, but we agree! It's amazing how Obama seems to be ahead of the curve on so many foreign policy matters. I guess that inexperience really pays off.

Before yo judge me... I want to tell all of you "I HATE WAR"
What I don't understand is how our military forces can go into another country's land without their permission. I know the bad guys are there, but if we can go into Pakistan without the Pakistani government wanting us to, does that mean that if Russia or China or North Korea, or Cuba, or Iran, or Venezuela, or any other country have the right to come on American soil and kill their enemies ?
Can't we get a blanket permission from Pakistan government to go on their soil so we don't look like the bad guys to the rest of the world?

Why don't you ask Bush why he ordered French soldiers in Afghanistan not to shoot Bin Laden when they had him in their scopes, twice!! Because he wanted to wait for the elections to do it, so idiots like you, would vote for His party, again!

Must be true! It was on the Internet!

Bush has the mentality of a school yard bully. Someone needs to take him out of the school yard and put him in detention.

Here is your proof that what I posted is true!

The newspaper Le Figaro said Thursday that the documentary is based on interviews of four soldiers by filmmakers Éric de Lavarène and Emmanuel Razavi, who call their documentary Ben Laden, les ratés d'une traque (Bin Laden, the Failures of a Manhunt ).

Good for President Bush. Keep the Taliban on their heels. Attack, attack, attack! Eliminate them from the earth. O BAM MA want to talk, and compromise. Now that's change for the better, right?

Now hadenough,

You are an anti-semitic S o B. Without Israel in the region, you would be praying on Fridays and not on Sundays.

McBush will carry on the illegal raids and get us into another war. We can't afford to throw away more money and soldiers. Diplomacy and friendship development will win over those who appose us.....not the same old crap that McCain supports.

Allowing the Republicans to continue in power will be one of the biggest mistakes of the 21st century. This is a fact, not a smear.

Choose the best candidate - Obama and his experienced running mate, Biden!

Bush just did what Obama said he would do as President. You might like to rethink your position on who you back for President.

it was an illegal attack on foriegn soil bush should be tried for treason for his warcrimes we have no buisness invading other countries soil

Dan,
Shouldn't this have been the main objective to begin with and NOT Iraq?

Fisherman, are you conceding that Obama has no experience? Sure does sound that way. I'm certain you are right. Imagine that, I agreed with a democrat.

Hey Todd, Why didn't you get that attitude up and running before 911 so that maybe Bin Laden could get a laugh too. Typical LDL bulls**t. Always running on against something, but never offering an intelligent alternative.

Amen! I thought Richard Nixon was an idiot, but Mr. Bush tops him by a mile! It will take many years of good governing to get us back to where we were before George W. I hope Mr. Obama can find video of the republican condemnation of him for the same idea, and air it on his tv ads.

ok, so bush is an idiot for doing it, but you want video of obama suggesting the same thing? what a knucklehead.

the pakistani govt is worthless, we should have been doing this all along, go get the bastards wherever they are.

Just as obama advised months and months ago, this is the real front. When Obama first said this last Spring, the administration talking heads were instructed to say it was "naive," but now they're doing exactly what Obama suggested. Yet another example of how the administration takes its cues from the democratic candidate, hoping to take credit. This is typical Rove-ian strategy, take credit when there is a positive strategy or something has gone well, blame the dems or the "terrorists" when something doesn't.

They've done the same thing with the stock market. Every time it goes up, the fact is sure to be included in a speech or on Fox News. Every time it goes down, it's either the fault of the over-taxing, over-regulating dems, or even of the American people themselves, a "nation of whiners," in the words of a McCain spokesman. Every time the oil price drops, it's because Bush simply announced that drilling will take place, 20 years from now. Suddenly, the laws of supply and demand are magically suspended. If the oil price goes up, then it's the dems' fault, or the "terrorists."

Look, I could really care less who gets "credit" for this crap. Follow these sons-of-@!$%#es wherever they are hiding, whatever cave they've buried themselves into, into whatever country that is sheltering them under the guise of "sovereignty and territorial integrity" and kill them. Straight into the gates of hell if we have to, but get them...and KILL THEM.

I am sick of dishing out money on an annual basis so that we can sit idle "waiting them out". The hero's of wars past did the job and then came home. He we sit, 7 years to the day after it happened and a country that is knowingly hiding these terrorists is telling us "no entry allowed". I say, "fair enough...we can't come in, then neither can our money, our jobs, our support, our help, our food, aid, etc. Just as you turn your back on the free world, so shall we do you."

See how quickly the starving will hand over their "protected masses" them.

God Bless us, and God Bless the USA, Republican AND Democrat alike.

Shawn

I agree, this wild goose chase has gone on long enough. We have sattelite resolutions high enough to read someones business card (well, the government does, in the private sector its regulated to something like a foot per pixel max or something), so we should have caught him be now. All they need is a little peep into the periscope so to speak...

although there is one place I dont agree...
"Straight into the gates of hell if we have to"
lets avoid that place though, shall we? after all, if hes already there then our work is already done :)

You are right about one main point USING WOMEN AND CHILDREN AS SHIELDS. Isn't that EXACTLY what McCain is doing by hiring Ms. Palin to shield him from his obviously demented and senile actions.

As Jesus said, "Clean up your own house before you attempt to clean your neighbors."

Skipper: I couldn't agree with you more that Afghanistan is where Bush should have concentrated all his efforts in retaliation for 9/11. Frankly, I think he made a huge mistake taking on Iraq at that point. Clearly, Afghanistan is where Bin Laden was/is and Pakistan is in cahoots with him. However, there is no way in hell that Bush will leave office in January holding his head held high because Bin Laden has been captured. If anything, Bin Laden is probably more secure now than ever. So much has been concentrated on Iraq that BinLaden is just sitting pretty and watching it all happen,laughing at us all. Bush missed the mark on that one and now he's desperate to do anything he can to try to salvage his presidency.Too little, too late. Let's hope that whomever takes his place can do better. It won't be difficult.

Using women and children as a human shield for bombs and bullets is a little different than appointing a female VP.

As much as I disagree with McCain's policies, this statement is ridiculous.

Shouldn't this have been Bush's main objective to begin with and NOT Iraq?

Camacho-come up with something new.

Lame comeback but I see you don't have an answer either.

Iraq was just as rife with corruption and extremist sympathizers. It was really only a matter of time until Saddam made another move. Which is better? Waiting for them to attack us or being pre-emptive?

By that logic we should be attacking north korea, iran, just about every country in africa, israel, and looking even further ahead, just about every nation in the world, since eventually chance dictates most of them will attack us.

Alway...what brilliant logic! You must be from San Fransisco?

Let's begin the process by helping our own fractured, sick and festering Country. Then we can give advice and help to others.

Have you ever left the U.S.? Have you ever served in the military? The answer to both must be no if you think we are a "fractured, sick and festering Country". I think I must stop reading what you write before I read your first post my day was going well. I got a great parking spot, my coffee was exactly right, taught a freshman intro to Poly-Sci class (I just like freshman they are so challenged) and I had a cell phone message that the car I bought would be ready to be picked up tonight. Now I feel like smashing my head into a wall. Thanks a lot.

Gee, Wolfie, you live awfully close to the edge to let your good day get so easily spoiled. Well, anyway, as we go about the day stating our opinions, often regardless of fact, mine is that we need to pull a big ship up, load all our stuff onto it, and soldiers, then head it "home". Tomorrow. 9-12. Then I would be having an ever so nice day myself, in reflection of the soldiers' safety from those stone age citizens. Sigh.

And then what happens the day after tomorrow?

Our enemies will pick up the pieces, quietly grow in strength, and we'll be scratching our heads watching thousands die on americans soil from an attack wondering how this could happen.

Why the hell are we all talking about nuclear conflagration again. Did someone restart the cold war?

"Did someone restart the cold war?"

Perhaps we did...

EMC408, That's not fair. You used the tried and true method to stump a liberal. After they finish telling you what we should have done from the LDL's point of view, you say "yeah, and then what", and it stumps them every time.

EMC, Those people aren't in a big hurry to come here - they are too busy killing eachother. The moronic criminals that organized here for the 9-11 disaster got through an inept and ineffective Immigration process - has that been fixed? I'm not holding my breath. Whether America occupies Arabia and its pals' countries, or not, if those that would do harm can slip through our borders - especially the one with Canada, well, we all know what could happen. And, those morons were not a bunch of nomadic herders, they were mostly disgruntled Saudis, and our "friends" the Saudis better fix their own stuff, because their mullahs aren't exactly going to give a rat's behind what America wants.
At worst, if one of those countries did invade the U.S., at least we would FINALLY have a nice big target, sadly lacking these days. We need to leave "there", be vigilant at home, but in the end it's like someone who really wants to "get" you - if they want to bad enough, they won't be easily stopped.
And last of all, if the "West" had stayed out of "over there" (and now I'm going back nearly a 100 years, to Britain's ghastly experience in Arabia), maybe all this garbage would not be happening. Instead we prop up one little despot after another, whether the Shah of Iran, that other bleep of Iraq I won't even mention, Syria's Asaad, the Soviet "Viet Nam" in Afganistan for 10 flippin' years, the Saudi kings - our really good "friends" , Pakistan (despite our real friend being India)... the list of screw ups just doesn't end - except maybe now that America is BROKE, maybe now we'll be forced to stay out of these people's business. I'm all for refugees, if they want "brain drain" until the only people left are nomadic camel herders, great. Maybe France will take them. Meanwhile, our people suffer at home too, and now rumbles are coming from Georgia as regards more trouble??? Come on!! Everyone is SICK of this bull!

So Joe, your saying it's OK to go on to Pakistan's soil after bad guys. Does that mean all the other countries can come on American soil after what they consider their bad guys ?

Joe Slater, wouldn't that then put us in the same nation-building mode we're in with Iraq? I don't think we can afford another Iraq. We must find a better way to deal with terrorists than to invade countries. To me, it's like using a shotgun to kill a mosquito. It doesn't work very well and you create all sorts of unintended damage.
BTW, if we want the world to help with fighting terrororism, we can't very well say "screw-you". That didn't work in Iraq either.

Paul, "consider bad guys" ! what kind of American would not "consider" obama errr, osama and all his misguided pinhead followers, bad guys. You are obviously one of those socialist America haters who think "the rest of the world" is better than the U.S.A. I love how these commies here get to trash our country and the brave folks who go afar to keep them safe. And yes, it is ok to breach soveriegn countries boundaries, if they continually refuse to aid in the destruction of the "new nazi" scourge.

Don't let 1st impression get to you. I'm a veteran of the Korean war. I voted Democrat for the past 30 years, and this time voting for McCain and Palin for President and VP.. and the rest of the votes goes for the Democrats.. I travel to Russia almost every year.. And I realize that even with all our problems... there's no better place to live than the USA !

No sense telling you more, because you seem to have all the right answers and are never wrong GOD BLESS YOU and the USA !

Being secretive is fine....but we're about to find out that the wrath of Pakistan, a nuclear power, will come right into our backyard.

Great....go get 'um. Then kiss one or more of our major cities good-bye.

Wow Pakistan has an ICBM? Seriously you know more than all of the intelligence agencies in the world. That is amazing the rest of the world powers have this crazy idea that they can only reach about 1,000 miles unless Pakistan is going to pick it self up and run across the globe, I think we are safe. There should really be an IQ test on sites like this before you are allowed to post. What if someone actually read this and believed the nonsense you wrote. Some child may go to school thinking Pakistan has an ICBM he will tell his friends and soon a bunch of kids will be having bad dreams about nuclear winters. Oh yes never mind the fact their missiles can't even come close to reaching any part of the U.S. how about the perfect record we have for our missile defense system including shooting down a specific area of a satellite. Not only did we hit a bullet with a bullet we hit it in a particular spot of our choosing. So again please people may read what you say and actually take it seriously try to throw in some actual facts. Oh yeah and that whole American nuclear arsenal not a deterrent at all.

Yes, we can hit a bullet with a bullet. But we can't find Bin Laden, not only can't we find him, GWB has already stated that we are not interested in finding him.

We can not and must not use saturation bombing or nuclear weapons. One, because it only promotes fear in other middle eastern countries and fear promotes distrust. Distrust promotes violence against the US, and also in turn breeds more terrorism. Two, because there are nuclear weapons in the Middle East, not to mention Russia and China and don't think for a moment that someone won't use them against the US, since nuclear weapons not only have a direct impact on the country that they are used on, but on the surrounding countries as well. Don't even bother to think that our nuclear arsenal is a deterrent. When one feels that one has nothing to lose, one fears nothing not even a nuclear arsenal. Three, don't bet on your own safety. Nuclear weapons can be hidden in something as small as a brief case, and since the borders of this country are in fact not secure, it is not a stretch of the imagination to see that your idea of being secure is a fallacy.

Wolfman,

The terrorist that made this day (9/11) infamous had no method of delivering their destruction ... but they did. It wouldn't necessarily take an ICBM to deliver a nuclear punch.

Have you ever seen a nuclear car bomb? Me neither, and I hope I never do.

I suggest before you pull out the big NUKE THEM LOLZ!!! option, you do some research on what nuclear devices leave behind. I would suggest you google 'hiroshima survivors accounts' and come back after reading them and then you can tell me you still want to use the nuclear option.

"He was badly burnt just like myself. We walked toward the river. And on the way we saw many victims. I saw a man whose skin was completely peeled off the upper half of his body and a woman whose eye balls were sticking out. Her whole baby was bleeding. A mother and her baby were lying with a skin completely peeled off."
Do you still want to go nuclear?

Please I wait with baited breath for your third party answer. If it includes LSD, trees, and Jefferson Airplane I am in for the LSD part.

Sorry to have to invoke reality here, but hand wringing and sweetness will not solve anything. Since the dawn of man, the combination of religion and politics has resulted in irrational violence, in fact many times worse in the past than what we have experienced since 9-11. We cannot try to reason with any kind of religious fundamentalist. We should be firm in going ruthlessly against those who are trying to return us to the Dark Ages, whether they be Muslims, Christians or whatever. We need, at the same time, to be selective, and avoid hurting the undecided, turning them into a new generation of fanatics. I believe this can be done with good intelligence, selective strikes and education. We should not care about the much vaunted "sovereignty" of Pakistan, since a country that cannot control its own territory is not sovereign.

Well said.

I agree religion has been the result of irrational violence. Just look at what it is doing to our country. However your declaring that Pakistan is not a sovereign nation does not make it so. Obviously the Pakistanis and other nations such as India and the Philippines who are struggling with terrorists within their borders as well don't see it your way. Or do you suggest that this country invades them also?

sheesh, so much stupidity in one comment... it's not an invasion, and I get mad when people aren't getting laid too. I assume that's what you meant. I blame bush for the whole lack of sex issue!

write in hillary, that'll get sex back in the oval office and across the country!!!!

Bob- My Country has a standing Army of 1.4 million the war did not cause the sub-prime housing issue the greedy banks did but yet when the government steps in to save a bank people like you scream scream when we let them fail for the poor business practices people like you scream. I realize how easy it is to remain uneducated about the issue but believe it or not Bush nor his policies caused the current problem with the housing market. I realize this must be a lot for you to digest I suggest you drink some Cool-Aid, put on Air America, sit in your bean bag chair, fire up that doubie, put on Cream, and try to think for yourself.

"Our" country may have a standing army of 1.4 million, but they are not standing here, but in fact most are standing in other countries. Alaska in fact has a severe shortage of National Guard reserves, and as Mrs. Palin so likes to point out, it is right next door to Russia.

Bush was in charge when this happened. Personal responsibility demands that he be assigned much of the blame.

By the way, I always do my own thinking. I get my information from various sources of all political positions and drwa my own conclusions. I never spout party line ideologies. That is too similar to the Soviet Union or China.

The lack of governmental oversight allowed Fannie Mae to buy loans they should not have, so yes, it was Bush administration's fault.

dumb or insane? I was just thinking the same thing about you. Your hero obama said he wants to do the same thing.

Yes but when it comes from the Almighty Obama it is fine especially given his unquestionable knowledge of geo-politics; which, should not be out-shined by his knowledge of American geography. He is so close to being omnipotent he knows that eventually there will be another seven states. I don't think he made a mistake when he said 57 states I believe it was a prediction. I also believe soon pigs will take up the practice of wearing lipstick. SO LET IT BE WRITTEN SO LET IT BE DONE!!!!!!!
All hail the mighty Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes Fisherman144 dumb and insane for not going into Pakistan sooner and expecting a half-wit like Musharraf to do anything. Bin Laden and the Taliban are responsible for the disaster 7 years ago today. Screw the Pakistan government. I'm absolutely NO fan of Bush, but he's finally got some balls and is going after the people responsible for 911....7 years later.

He's only doing it now to gain points for the Republican party...November is just around the corner. This is something he should have done right from the start then he would've been considered one of the greatest presidents to go down in history but he screwed that up and now he is the worst instead...

Osama may not still be in Pakistan, but the Taliban training camps are.

Taliban training camps are not just in Pakistan... They are where ever anyone has access to any media of any sort. You think it takes a big complex the size of a movie theater to train terrorists? All it takes is a means of communication. Any cell phone, any computer, any HAM radio, all can be used by terrorists to train other terrorists. You dont need to go to a camp to learn to be a terrorist, the internet is just as effective. Need to train plane hijackers? No problem, MS flight sim X. Need to train a fighter? No problem, just go to the local gym. Need to train a sniper? No problem, just pop in any Wii shooting game... If you are were a terrorist, what would you prefer? 1000 decent terrorists all around the globe or 100 good terrorists all stuck in pakistan? Its all about mass production, and a camp just wont cut it any more.

Why was it Eisenhower was able to tell the media the details of Operation Overlord before it took place and no one leaked the story because they were loyal, patriotic, and decent people unlike today's rag pushers.

AMEN!

I am so tired of reading these stories that include, "said by 'xxx' official who spoke on anonymity because they were not supposed to speak on the topic...well if we're supposed to speak on it...then SHUT THE HELL UP AND DON'T!!!

I'd like to know as much as everyone what is going on (transparent white house) but not when it's looking to plan something that requires some level of secrecy...pathetic that we've lost of ability to keep a secret, inside cowardly hiding under the shield of anonymity.

Now let me see if I have this straight. You don't want a forewarning of an action that could possibly cause a nuclear WWIII. So tell me how much of a warning would you not want before a nuclear weapon is dropped on your city as a result of the actions of this or any other administration?

By the way people, this is not the same scenario that it was during WWII. There were no other countries in the world possessing nuclear weapons during Eisenhower's time. The comparison that you make is in fact invalid.

no, what i don't want to see is something that says, "Headline: Troops to invade city of 'xxx' on west province at 7pm EST"...According to a white house source, who asked to be kept anonymous, military troops are looking to fortify city 'x' and province 'y' with the intent to attack 'z' at 7pm.

I think in a time of war the element of surprise could be a good thing...don't you think?

I mean, what action would you take if someone said, "on source of anonymity, we're going to break into your house at 8:27 EST tonight"...think you'd prepare, fortify, or just chalk it up to wasted headlines?

Is this why GWB's administration dropped leaflets on Iraq announcing an upcoming invasion? Real secrecy there.

It is not that the story came out prior to the attacks on Pakistan, but indeed after. So yelling that secrecy has been violated is false. The story only came out after Pakistan declared to the world that these attacks had taken place.

I see Shawn that you don't want to answer the question that I asked as to how much of a warning do you not want. Why? Can't you answer it, or are you just afraid of thinking about the consequences that no warning of world events could mean to you and yours?

This is not a war on another nation according to GWB's explanation of it being a war on terrorism. This is not WWII where enemies were clearly known, and marked. This is not a war where the terrorists respect another sovereign nations boundaries. The mountains of Pakistan are extremely hard to police, the US forces that are in Afghanistan can't even police the mountains in Afghanistan in order to deter terrorists from crossing over from Pakistan. What makes you think that the Pakistani government can do what we ourselves can not do. India also has terrorists within their boundaries, so does the Philippines, and many of the far east nations. Are you suggesting that we should also invade them? How much of a standing army do you think this country has? And how many sovereign nations do you think would tolerate this action by the US?

I don't really want a warning before a nuclear attack because there's not a whole lot you can do. Bomb shelters won't work because the radiation is around for hundreds of years. The radius of such an attack is pretty big (not that I could get out if I wanted as the roads would probably be jammed to a halt). I think I'd rather not spend my last minutes in a panic and then suddenly cease to exit.

"My soul is prepared, How's yours?" =P

Is that why so many military and government people will talk about anything as long as they don't give their names because they are not allowed to talk about it?

I'm glad to hear your soul is prepared. Are you also willing to take on the mantle of responsibility for the deaths of millions of others, as well as the destruction of a planet made uninhabitable as a result? Simply because you don't want to know and not knowing benefits only you?

As to my soul, that is quite frankly none of your business. That is between God and myself.

Yes I am sure it is your republican friends that are just unable to understand. I agree it would be easy to reason with nations that allow young women to be buried alive for wanting to pick their own husbands. Nations that allow women to be stoned to death for "allowing themselves to be raped". Yes we can reason with these people, the war in Iraq is lost, and you are not a liberal in disguise. Would you feel better if Bush was sitting behind his desk as opposed to his ranch? According to you and yours Bush is orchestrating the war so maybe while he was in Texas he was planning his next attack on American soil. I hear this time he is going to blame the Swiss-No war for cheese!!!
This is hell on earth and you are delusional.

Wolfman, This country once condoned slavery. The original Republican party actually favored allowing slavery west of the Mississippi. We did, however, overcome these deficiencies. No other nation had to do this for us. We made the change.

impunity? what from cave to cave?

I don't believe this is about one man (Bin Laden) or his thousand guerillas. It seems naive to think that if we get him, no more terrorism against the US or it's allies.

I happen to appreciate the absence of post-9/11 attacks on American soil and am thankful that we are engaging those who want to harm us in a pro-active, rather than reactive, manner.

Our military is in shambles? Where are you from?

Our military is so overextended that no military analysts believe that we are capable of deploying enough combat brigades to meet any other challenges. It encourages Russian, Chinese, North Korean and international terrorist adventurism. We feed the current needs with extended stays and stop loss, we borrow money to retool at which we are woefully behind while we spend 10 billion per month in the Iraqi rat hole we created. Veterans Affairs are part of our military and our current care and treatment of returning Vets is shameful. The dead are not even allowed press coverage when their corpses are returned.
If you care to do more than puff your chest you would read the opinions of the Joint Chiefs on Readiness and how many available troops we have not in the funnel to Iraq. Afghanistan is deteriorating and we are fighting our wars with guard units. The regular Army could not meet our commitments for a month without the guard and reserve a duty they have never been intended for or used. It is an unconscionable use of our friends and neighbors and is not sustainable.

As to Osama Bin Laden he has sent numerous videos and over the last seven years the last time we knew where he was was in the Tora Bora cave systems in 2001. Since then we have been unable to locate him with any degree of certainty with reports ranging as far away as the Kyber Pass and the China border areas. If the administration is to believed he still heads and directs a global terror network which we have been unable to eradicate. If he is doing all this while hiding in a cave we must be the most inept military ever created. Stop believing propaganda we are worse off than we were seven years ago and know less about his whereabouts.

I'm sorry did I read correctly? "Friendship development???" What are you smoking and can I have some? Must be a nice little world you are living in. Seriously, do you think that these hateful terrorist groups are going to come and hold hands with the U.S. and sing kumbaya? The whole "lets talk and be friends with the crazy terrorists" attitude SCARES me to death! It's so naive.

I would strongly suggest that anyone who feels that these terrorist groups and even governments of countries like Pakistan would be willing to make "friends" with the U.S. do some unbiased reading of intelligence information and history of terrorist groups like al quaeda. For reals, it is very scarey and they do not have love or friendship in their hearts. They are radicals and they hate Americans so much they are willing to die to see us die. Seriously. Read. The information is out there and I don't mean in the media.

Even Obama changed his attitude once he saw for himself.

Maybe because he wants to be reelected. What a stupid comment.

Another stupid comment. Bush can't be reelected.

A very informed comment. Bush is trying to prop up the republican ticket. That's pretty obvious, else he would have done this a lot sooner.

It has? Your proof of that is what............? Our still unsecured borders? Or the fact that few terrorists have been actually arrested in this country? As to the attack on the twin towers, what don't you understand about the majority of these attackers being Saudis? And what is Bush doing about the breeding ground that these attackers came from, why nothing other than hand holding with their leaders. Saudi Arabia is in fact the most extreme of all the middle east nations, especially when it comes to women's rights. Bin Laden is in fact a Saudi. Yet we do not touch this nation. Why?

1. Oil
2. There aren't Taliban training camps there
3. We need all the allies we can get in that area
4. The government isn't sanctioning terrorist
5. Oh yea, Oil

I agree with reason number 1 and 5. As to the others, I'm not so sure, since 2 and 4 can not be proven other than to take the Saudi's word for it.

This is pretty much the scenario, lose-lose unless America just stays out. (As an aside, I have seen at least 2 grannies - in wheelchairs - set aside for the random airport screenings, and I absolutely hate to fly anymore, tho' don't have much choice with family all over.)

MovingOut,
My 20 year old son DID join the service and will likely be in Afghanistan this time next year being shot at by the Taliban as they come over from Pakistan. How many of our troops have to die over there before we do something about the lawless Northwestern Frontier in Pakistan that harbor these terrorists??? You can sit back and judge because you personally have nothing invested in the situation. The soldiers and families of soldiers fighting and dying over there do so maybe you should give that some consideration. Wars AND freedom are not free and that's about the only thing you got right in your post.

Actually, I'm a veteran of the first gulf war and my wife is a veteran of this most recent one. I have all the respect due for our services but I have no respect for someone who would bash a sharp sword against a rock just because they can. I hope for your son's safety but still do not believe we have any business half the world away. If we're going to fight terrorists, we need to fight them at the gate on our terms- not at every spot they happen to trod through across the globe. This is tactics 101.

All due respect to you and your wife too. I spoke out of turn regarding your situation.

No offense taken. At the end of the day we're both Americans. Again, I do wish for the safety of your son and, really, everyone in our armed services. I do wish we'd reinstate the draft just so that more people recognize that we're either in this or out of this together. And I do agree, many do stand on the sidelines and make calls when they really don't have anything to loose. There is a lot at stake and a draft would really help people recognize that better. What also gets me is the whole contractor situation. Hiring contractors to gaurd US dignitaries in Iraq when we have a strong military seems like a the entire thing is just a business. Imagine if during WWII if FDR and Churchill were shuttled through Europe by civilian contractors. I have to wonder about our generation sometimes.

I understand you point. However, not all people are warriors. I, for one, am thankful to live in a country where military service is not mandatory. America will be fine. Give ourselves some credit ... not all doom and gloom. That can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Only Obama had anough sense to know where to wage war. Bush/Cheney/McCain obviously didn't. It wouldn't be so bad but we lost 4,000 soldiers, incurred 50,000 casualties, killed 100,000 Iraqis and spent $1trillion doing it. Otherwise, it wasn't so bad.