New Video From Binladden

[sgtmac_46]

It astounds me that anyone would be in support of these activities. Especially a Martial Artists that supposedly puts honor above all else.

I've heard their arguments enough to know the script. They don't support the terrorists, they believe that the issue is complicated because they don't like our government at this point, and they really can't bring themselves to believe ANYTHING that someone they don't like in our government might believe. If Bush calls someone a terrorist, they automatically HAVE to take the contrarian view and defend the fact that the person in question is either not a terrorist, or at least claim the issue is 'complicated'. It's mostly contrarianism, pure and simple. If a Democrat were in power doing the same thing, they'd be supporting it.

Sadly, however, if a Democrat were in power, the Republicans would be acting like the left is acting now. Take Clinton's experience dealing in the Balkans and Iraq.

It's funny how politics turns people in to complete contrary children sometimes.

 

[MA-Caver]

Don't you get it? bin Laden is a 'freedom fighter' in the world-view of some, and BUSH is the criminal.

"If crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fires... what do freedom fighters fight?" ~ George Carlin
"We are looking for a 6 foot tall Arab man on dialysis... WHY is that so hard to find??" ~ Robin Williams

Bin Laden is a master mind alright. Trying to win sympathy by saying hey, we'll talk peace now. He's still a criminal mastermind that orchestrated the murder of over 3000 American citizens on 9/11.
He wants to talk peace but still holds a club. Make peace with me MY way and I won't bash your head in.
If he wants to really talk peace then he should do it behind bars paying for his own crimes.

Civilian casulaties are a fact of any armed conflict. Horrifying and heart-rendering it's true. Only way to stop it is to stop armed conflict altogether or create no-man's lands in sparsely populated areas for the express purpose of two countries to resolve their differences. A pipe dream at best I think. :disgust:

We must not and cannot be hoodwinked by this man who hates all things good and just and that are the American way. As jdinca said: he and his kind are NOT interested in a truce unless it's on their terms. And those (terms) would practically remove our American way of life... here in America.

That we should find better alternative ways to help other ailing countries with tyants and dictators and oppression is a given. Going over and bombing a country to the stone age and trying to impose OUR way of life upon them is intrusive. It's like me walking in with a gun into any MT's member's home and saying you're going to start running your house THIS way because it's a better way to do it. Betcha ya gonna fight me to get rid of me aren't ya?

 

[celtic_crippler]

Don't be fooled by partisan rhetoric. There's not a whole lot of difference between the Dem's and Rep's. Think about it. There's only two major parties!! They both benefit throuhg cooperation. The only way to maintain a balance is to have an odd number. That's why the founding fathers created 3 branches of government!!! Wake up!!!!! Smell the coffeee!!! Do the research!!! Use your head!!!!!!!!

 

[michaeledward]

by this man who hates all things good and just and that are the American way. As jdinca said: he and his kind are NOT interested in a truce unless it's on their terms. And those (terms) would practically remove our American way of life... here in America.

I would really like to know how these claims are being made ....

Who, on this board, has indicated that anyone is interested in negotiating with Bin Laden?

Who, on this board, or even elsewhere, has claimed interest in a truce with al-Qaeda?

Here is where this started ........

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=488025&postcount=5

I think John Kerry wrote the material used for Bin Laden's latest....

Good Grief ... pay attention people.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Bin Laden is a master mind alright. Trying to win sympathy by saying hey, we'll talk peace now. He's still a criminal mastermind that orchestrated the murder of over 3000 American citizens on 9/11.
He wants to talk peace but still holds a club. Make peace with me MY way and I won't bash your head in.
If he wants to really talk peace then he should do it behind bars paying for his own crimes.

bin Laden is obvious a student of PT Barnum....There are suckers born every minute. I read the peace offer, however, as a bluff. He knows he lacks any capacity to reach us at this point in time, but he has nothing to lose by offering 'peace'. Bargaining almost ALWAYS come from a position of weakness, not strength. Hitler didn't bargain with anyone in 1941, but there was plenty of bargaining in early 1945. bin Laden is interesting in gaining whatever he gain out of this mess.

[MA-Carver]
Civilian casulaties are a fact of any armed conflict. Horrifying and heart-rendering it's true. Only way to stop it is to stop armed conflict altogether or create no-man's lands in sparsely populated areas for the express purpose of two countries to resolve their differences. A pipe dream at best I think. :disgust: [/quote] What's more, civilian casualties are a weapon of the other side. That's why armed insurgents in Iraq fire at US troops from behind human shields of women and children. Every civilian casualty is a weapon for the insurgents, and they purposely set up scenarios to increase casualties.

[MA-Carver]
We must not and cannot be hoodwinked by this man who hates all things good and just and that are the American way. As jdinca said: he and his kind are NOT interested in a truce unless it's on their terms. And those (terms) would practically remove our American way of life... here in America. [/quote] I would hope that we all would be smarter than to be hoodwinked, but there are some people who'll believe anything so long as it's by someone who hates Bush.

[MA-Carver]
That we should find better alternative ways to help other ailing countries with tyants and dictators and oppression is a given. Going over and bombing a country to the stone age and trying to impose OUR way of life upon them is intrusive. It's like me walking in with a gun into any MT's member's home and saying you're going to start running your house THIS way because it's a better way to do it. Betcha ya gonna fight me to get rid of me aren't ya?[/quote] Of course we DO walk in to people's with guns houses under certain conditions.

If a man is beating his wife, or holding his family hostage, you would expect me to go in to his house armed and put a stop to it, wouldn't you?

 

[Bigshadow]

He has no honor

That is precisely what the British said of the colonists who revolted and used less than honorable battle tactics (shooting officers and sniping from the woods, not dressing in bright colors, etc)

It astounds me that anyone would be in support of these activities. Especially a Martial Artists that supposedly puts honor above all else.

It would astound me too if someone were in support of these activities, especially a Martial Artist! If that was a reference to me, then you are very misguided. I find it truely barbaric and vicious to do the things they do, very revolting. However, I am not going to have a knee-jerk reaction and start frothing at the mouth and let my emotions cloud my thinking and reasoning.

 

[Bigshadow]

If a Democrat were in power doing the same thing, they'd be supporting it.

Sadly, however, if a Democrat were in power, the Republicans would be acting like the left is acting now. Take Clinton's experience dealing in the Balkans and Iraq.

It's funny how politics turns people in to complete contrary children sometimes.

It is funny how people fall into the permissible spectrum of public opinion and do not think outside the sandbox that has been placed before them. The Republicans and demoncrats are just the right and left hand of the same head/body. I don't subscribe to either political view point. Probably close to libertarian really.

 

[Bigshadow]

bin Laden is obvious a student of PT Barnum....There are suckers born every minute. I read the peace offer, however, as a bluff. He knows he lacks any capacity to reach us at this point in time, but he has nothing to lose by offering 'peace'.

I didn't take his offer of a truce seriously, I figured it was nothing more than posturing and bluffing.

 

[jdinca]

What's more, the reason Israel is an issue at ALL is the belief among Muslims that NO nation should exist in the middle-east that isn't Islamic. It isn't what Israel has DONE, it's what Israel IS....or rather isn't. Other Islamic nations could care less about the plight of Palestinians. Many have Palestinian populations they, themselves, repress. Further, other groups in the middle-east have been FAR more repressed than the Palestinians. The Kurds come to mind. Yet, as long as they are oppressed by Muslims, everythings fine in the minds of the Islamic world.

It is a point of irony that even the other Muslims don't like the Palestinians. The opposite is also true.

I'm afraid that no matter what we do, there will some day be a Kurdistan. There will be plenty of bloodshed and time before it happens, but the writing appears to be on the wall.

 

[michaeledward]

The 'Marshall Plan for Iraq' has died an ignoble death, very quietly.

This, from today's New York Times....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/international/middleeast/24reconstruct.html?ex=1295758800&en=a75e40af61a6a236&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

The first official history of the $25 billion American reconstruction effort in Iraq depicts a program hobbled from the outset by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting, secrecy and constantly increasing security costs, according to a preliminary draft.[/quote[

 

[sgtmac_46]

This, from today's New York Times....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/international/middleeast/24reconstruct.html?ex=1295758800&en=a75e40af61a6a236&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

The first official history of the $25 billion American reconstruction effort in Iraq depicts a program hobbled from the outset by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting, secrecy and constantly increasing security costs, according to a preliminary draft.[/quote[

So what you're saying is, that because it's been like every other such bureaucratic process in the history of the world (both the successful and unsuccessful) it is an unqualified failure?

All such projects are, to my knowledge 'hobbled from the outset by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting, secrecy and constantly increasing security costs'.

Explain to me again how long it took to rebuild and democratize Japan and Germany? It certainly took more than three years, and Truman didn't have nearly half of Congress and half the media fighting him every step of the way.

Or, perhaps you could point to a similar project that wasn't 'hobbled' as such, and was more successful in a shorter period of time. Maybe the post-civil war reconstruction? Nope. Perhaps the rebuilding after WWI? Not likely. World War II Marshall plan? Don't think so. None of those were unequivical successes after 3 years of effort. Perhaps i'm missing one you could point out as a model.

Most likely, you, like so many others, are simply playing on the modern short-attention span of the average citizen, that says if it can't be done by the end of the week, somebody has screwed up, most especially in light of political factionism.

 

[michaeledward]

So what you're saying is, that because it's been like every other such bureaucratic process in the history of the world (both the successful and unsuccessful) it is an unqualified failure?

All such projects are, to my knowledge 'hobbled from the outset by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting, secrecy and constantly increasing security costs'.

Explain to me again how long it took to rebuild and democratize Japan and Germany? It certainly took more than three years, and Truman didn't have nearly half of Congress and half the media fighting him every step of the way.

Or, perhaps you could point to a similar project that wasn't 'hobbled' as such, and was more successful in a shorter period of time. Maybe the post-civil war reconstruction? Nope. Perhaps the rebuilding after WWI? Not likely. World War II Marshall plan? Don't think so. None of those were unequivical successes after 3 years of effort. Perhaps i'm missing one you could point out as a model.

Most likely, you, like so many others, are simply playing on the modern short-attention span of the average citizen, that says if it can't be done by the end of the week, somebody has screwed up, most especially in light of political factionism.

Earlier in this thread, I made the statement that the "Reconstruction Plan" for Iraq had died. It has quietly disappeared before it had completed its objectives. The Bush Administration will not seek further funding.

This article, by the New York Times (which is, obviously not 'michaeledward'), explains in greater detail the abdication of the Bush Administrations promise, and legal responsibility, to rebuild the country of Iraq.

The Report discussed in this article (again, obviously, that report was not penned by michaeledward), apparently reports that funding goals were always inadequate to the task (not just badly managed), and created windfalls by design for KBR, of Halliburton/Cheney renown.

So, it is not about me.

While the reports are generally considered to be fabricated, the idea is easily understood; Secretary of State Powell's Pottery Barn Rule; If you break it, you own it. That the United States has stopped funding reconstruction of Iraq, is in direct opposition to that idea.

 

[michaeledward]

Here's another update from the New York Times international.

One official kept $2 million in a bathroom safe, another more than half a million dollars in an unlocked footlocker. One contractor received more than $100,000 to completely refurbish an Olympic pool but only polished the pumps; even so, local American officials certified the work as completed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/25/international/middleeast/25reconstruct.html?ex=1295845200&en=09c6e45c2d4566f9&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss