View Single Post
Old 08-11-2008, 05:23 AM   #30 (permalink)
menaz
Avant Garde
 
menaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: ST.Louis, Mo.
Posts: 16,819
menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!menaz will do you doggie style!
Quote:
so you still believe that the us gov't is after osama? i just reckon they need to use his name to invade more countries.
I was under the impression this thread wasn't about that.

Anyway... I'll answer your question... but in the future don't switch subjects.

It's not a matter of what I believe, as in wishful thinking. The government stated point blank the Osama situation at that time. They wouldn't mind capturing him. If the opportunity presented itself they would take it. However, they did became less concerned about him. WHY? Because... Osama bin laden had been completely marginalized. So they stayed focused on his top threes, it was a more effective way of disrupting their operations. Hence, The top threes became the ones who plotted everything and basically carried out the operations. And when you take them out they can't do much of anything no more. So the way the government saw it was they shouldn't spend all their time and resources looking for just one man whom they might not even find anyway. Instead osama should remain peripheral while they focused on disrupting his top threes whom continued to plot and carry out the major attacks. Makes sense don't it? Especially when you take into account by following this method Al-qaeda is pretty much completely disfunctional now. Ignored read it! You'll understand exactly what the goal was back then. It was how Al-qaeda as a whole had to be dealt with.

Would I like bin laden captured? Yes of course, however besides what I just told you it's alot harder than you might think getting osama. e.g. We've been after Whitey bulger since 1999 and still haven't caught him, are we using him as an excuse to invade other countries we might think he is in but can't confirm? NO! Remember Eric Rudolph? he comitted terrorist attacks in 1998 except unlike Whitey bulger he never left america and it took our government until 2005 to catch him.


Number 1.) Osama is completely off the grid.
Number 2.) Osama travels at night on motor bikes which the J-Stars aircraft can not easily see.
Number 3.) Osama has a network of people concealing him.
Number 4.) Pakistan won't allows to hunt for him.
wcco.com - U.S. Not Hunting Osama Bin Laden On Pakistan's Turf, Says Diplomat
note: this is form 2008.
Q. & A. : Looking For Osama: The New Yorker
Note: from 2003, since then conditions have changed.
Where is Osama Bin Laden? An analysis - Deep Background - msnbc.com
Note: this is from 2008.


It seems with Al-qaeda pretty much completely disfunctional now Al Qaeda 'essentially defeated' in Iraq - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Bush has shown more motivation in this subject as of late...
http://www.dawn.com/2008/07/05/top12.htm I Hope they get him don't you?


FYI. The Objective isn't to completely sqaush terrorism either. That is improbable. Let me give you a parallel example so you understand the objective better in more realistic terms... Think of piracy. Yes, it still exists, but it's no longer the terrifying force it was 200 years ago.

It's only fair you answer one of my questions now. Why did you ask me such a ignorant question?
__________________
"Spending for the common good" is not equitable to "spreading the wealth." Taxation for spending for the common good is paying a fee for services rendered. For example, I pay a tax and I get military/police/fire protection, infrastructure improvements, and mail services. Taxation for spreading the wealth is paying a fee for no services rendered. For example, I pay a tax and it goes in the form of a check to someone who pays no taxes.-menaz The Communist Manifesto's second plank is, "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."-Marx & Engles http://www.reason.tv/roughcut/show/628.htmlJanuary 20th, 2009. A date which will live in infamy.

Last edited by menaz; 08-11-2008 at 05:42 AM.
menaz is offline   Reply With Quote