When they agree that Israel has the right to exist, I'm sure we'll get the memo. Until then, they understand one thing--force.
and how do you get them to agree to that accept that without communication? The West has been using force against the Taliban for over a decade now and they're still around. We've managed to negotiate peaceful settlements with terrorists before now, its possible we can do it again. Of course the Taliban shall have to make several large concessions in order for this to happen.
Quote:
So Barbarian wants to turn this into a "But the republicans had terrorist friends too!" debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Barbarian
No, I'm pointing out that Obama changed U.S. policy from "I don't care where Osama is" to "Let's get him." A much better policy regarding terrorism, I think.
So you're claiming that under the Bush administration it was official US policy that the search for ObL be stopped, and under the Obama adminstration it proceeded as a top priority?
PROVIDE A SOURCE PLEASE.
Quote:
Osama bin Laden was a supposed allie of the US when the Soviets were invading Afghanistan
Quote:
So Ollie North was telling us. A freedom fighter, as Reagan put it.
I guess he didn't like your communist buddies from the Soviet Union trying to take over Afghanistan.
Quote:
and we can all thank B. Hussein Obama for personally hunting him down and sending him to enjoy his 72 virgins. If it weren't for his skills he developed from handing out foodstamps on the southside of Chicago as a community organizer, I doubt that he could have ever done it.
Quote:
Bush had the same capability that Obama had. He just lacked the will to do it.
Again, provide a source that there was a lack of "will" to locate bin Laden during the Bush administration.
Quote:
Back to Obama's terrorist connections:
Quote:
There’s Osama bin Laden, of course, killed in May.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.
You are aware that military intelligence has been working to locate many of these terrorists for years aren't you?
Are you under the impression that Obama has to personally give the go ahead in order for the military to take out various terrorist leaders?
"All societies of men must be governed in some way or other... Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled, either by a power within them, or by a power without them; either by the Word of God, or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible, or by the bayonet."
Slogan/motto:
Never be haughty to the humble; never be humble to the haughty.
Reputation:
February 4th, 2012, 07:46 PM
Quote:
So you're claiming that under the Bush administration it was official US policy that the search for ObL be stopped, and under the Obama adminstration it proceeded as a top priority?
Bush always had the means to get him, if he wanted to. For some reason, he went gently on terrorists like Osama. Obama was determined to get him and others like him. And has been very successful in killing terrorists who made war on us.
Quote:
Osama bin Laden was a supposed allie of the US when the Soviets were invading Afghanistan
Barbarian observes:
So Ollie North was telling us. A freedom fighter, as Reagan put it.
Quote:
I guess he didn't like your communist buddies from the Soviet Union trying to take over Afghanistan.
I love it when Cult Warrior is embarrassed.
Quote:
and we can all thank B. Hussein Obama for personally hunting him down and sending him to enjoy his 72 virgins.
Barbarian chuckles:
Bush had the same capability that Obama had. He just lacked the will to do it.
Quote:
Again, provide a source that there was a lack of "will" to locate bin Laden during the Bush administration.
See above.
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
Quote:
Back to Obama's terrorist connections:
There’s Osama bin Laden, of course, killed in May.
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.
Earlier this month officials confirmed that al Qaeda’s chief of Pakistan operations, Abu Hafs al-Shahri, was killed in Waziristan, Pakistan.
In August, ‘Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman, the deputy leader of al Qaeda was killed.
In June, one of the group’s most dangerous commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, was killed in Pakistan. In Yemen that same month, AQAP senior operatives Ammar al-Wa’ili, Abu Ali al-Harithi, and Ali Saleh Farhan were killed. In Somalia, Al-Qa’ida in East Africa (AQEA) senior leader Harun Fazul was killed.
Administration officials also herald the recent U.S./Pakistani joint arrest of Younis al-Mauritani in Quetta.
Going back to August 2009, Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mahsud was killed in Pakistan.
In September of that month, Jemayah Islamiya operational planner Noordin Muhammad Top was killed in Indonesia, and AQEA planner Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan was killed in Somalia.
Then in December 2009 in Pakistan, al Qaeda operational commanders Saleh al-Somali and ‘Abdallah Sa’id were killed.
In February 2010, in Pakistan, Taliban deputy and military commander Abdul Ghani Beradar was captured; Haqqani network commander Muhammad Haqqani was killed; and Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar was killed.
In March 2010, al Qaeda operative Hussein al-Yemeni was killed in Pakistan, while senior Jemayah Islamiya operative Dulmatin - accused of being the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombings – was killed during a raid in Indonesia.
In April 2010, al Qaeda in Iraq leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were killed.
In May, al Qaeda’s number three commander, Sheik Saeed al-Masri was killed.
You are aware that military intelligence has been working to locate many of these terrorists for years aren't you?
As Bush admitted, it just wasn't a priority back then. Obama made killing or capturing terrorists a priority. He's been very successful since. Bush could have done it. Now, I don't really think that his financial and social connections with the bin Laden family colored his judgement, but I do see that he was not very effective at fighting terrorists.
Quote:
Are you under the impression that Obama has to personally give the go ahead in order for the military to take out various terrorist leaders?
That's how it happened with Osama. He made it a priority and gave the go-ahead when we found him.
Quote:
More on Obama's ties with Islamic radicals.
Yep. Quite a body count, um? It's been a bad few years for America's enemies.
Bush could have done the same, if he had cared to do it. Obama was determined to crush Al-Qaeda, and kill or capture it's leaders. He's been very successful.
Because he's serious about going after terrorists.
Quote:
So you're claiming that under the Bush administration it was official US policy that the search for ObL be stopped, and under the Obama adminstration it proceeded as a top priority?
Bush always had the means to get him, if he wanted to. For some reason, he went gently on terrorists like Osama. Obama was determined to get him and others like him. And has been very successful in killing terrorists who made war on us.
Thank you for the video of a speech by former President Bush. I'll give Bush credit for looking at the big picture instead of focusing on one individual.
Now, provide me with some documentation that shows that military intelligence quit searching for Osama bin Laden during the Bush administration.
Quote:
Osama bin Laden was a supposed allie of the US when the Soviets were invading Afghanistan
Barbarian observes:
So Ollie North was telling us. A freedom fighter, as Reagan put it.
Quote:
I guess he didn't like your communist buddies from the Soviet Union trying to take over Afghanistan.
Quote:
I love it when Cult Warrior is embarrassed.
It is quite embarrassing to have to school a school teacher.
"On December 27, 1979, under cover cf an ongoing Soviet military buildup, heavily-armed elements of a Soviet airborne brigade were airlifted into Kabul, Afghanistan, to violently overthrow the regime of President Hafizollah Amin. Within hours after the beginning of this Trojan Horse-type operation, Soviet troops had overwhelmed the elite presidential guard, captured Amin, execut ed him along with several members of his family for crimes against the people and seized control of the capital." http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...of-afghanistan
Quote:
Back to Obama's terrorist connections:
Quote:
Bush could have done the same, if he had cared to do it. Obama was determined to crush Al-Qaeda, and kill or capture it's leaders. He's been very successful.
Because he's serious about going after terrorists.
If anything, to have dinner with them. Barbarian again makes this a Bush vs Obama debate, sidestepping the fact that Obama has close ties to known terrorists and terrorist organizations.
Is it possible for The Barbarian to continue this debate without using George W. Bush as a smokescreen?
More on Obama's terrorist ties:
"All societies of men must be governed in some way or other... Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled, either by a power within them, or by a power without them; either by the Word of God, or by the strong arm of man; either by the Bible, or by the bayonet."
Slogan/motto:
Never be haughty to the humble; never be humble to the haughty.
Reputation:
February 4th, 2012, 09:33 PM
Quote:
So you're claiming that under the Bush administration it was official US policy that the search for ObL be stopped
As you saw, Bush claimed he didn't care, and it wasn't a priority. Do you think he knew what the policy was?
Quote:
, and under the Obama adminstration it proceeded as a top priority?
“shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al-Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.” President Obama
Yep, looks like it did. And it worked. We got him.
Bush always had the means to get him, if he wanted to. For some reason, he went gently on terrorists like Osama. Obama was determined to get him and others like him. And has been very successful in killing terrorists who made war on us.
Quote:
I'll give Bush credit for looking at the big picture instead of focusing on one individual.
Notice, he didn't get a lot of subordinate leaders, either. Want to see Obama's list again?
Quote:
Now, provide me with some documentation that shows that military intelligence quit searching for Osama bin Laden during the Bush administration.
Bush just said he didn't care, and it wasn't a priority. Not surprisingly, we didn't find him. Obama made it a priority, and we did. That's not surprising, either.
Cult Warrior does a little projection:
I guess he didn't like your communist buddies from the Soviet Union trying to take over Afghanistan.
Back to Obama's terrorist connections:
(list of terrorists "connected" or captured on Obama's orders)
Barbarian observes:
Bush could have done the same, if he had cared to do it. Obama was determined to crush Al-Qaeda, and kill or capture it's leaders. He's been very successful.
Because he's serious about going after terrorists.
Quote:
If anything, to have dinner with them.
Seems unlikely. He had them killed or imprisoned.
Quote:
Barbarian again makes this a Bush vs Obama debate, sidestepping the fact that Obama has close ties to known terrorists and terrorist organizations.
I've already told you that I don't think Bush's social and business connections to Osama and other Saudis necessarily explains his unwillingness to vigorously search for terrorists as Obama did.
But it is true that Obama has been very successful in killing or capturing terrorists. Because, as you learned, it was a priority for him. Bush could have done the same, if it had been a priority for him. But he publicly declared it wasn't that important to him.
Any thoughts on 
negotiating with terrorists or pulling out of Afghanistan? 
Until then, they understand one thing--force.
Linear Mode
