95five-0

Ok here is the deal "Bin Laden praises al-Zarqawi" is the headline on the top of most new sites this morning. My question is who really cares. I say we treat Bin Laden just like you do a kid in the back seat of a car that is trying to annoy you. If you just ignore him he will go away. We have destroyed his train camps. He lives in constant hiding and we have cut off a large supply of his money. Really the only way for him to still mess with us and give his supports hope is by making these video. But what I suggest is that the media does not post the videos or even meantion them. Then this would completely take away the purpose of do them. He would be just another crazy guy in a cave making home videos. It is just like when the KKK has a parade if nobody showed up that be more detrimental to their point then going there and getting in a fight with them.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13600778/

yustr

The real headline should read: "al-Zarquai's dead yet the violence continues unabated."

Just ignoring him here in the US won't keep Aljazeera and other media from parrotting his rants. And he did (supposedly) mastermind the nodal event of the Bush presidency.

And least we forget But that was nearly 1800 days ago and it's dammed spiteful to keep bringing up how the worlds most powerful nation cannot seem to find one guy. Oh yeah, we stopped looking for him on March 20th 2003.

jpistorius

Another problem is we are offering such a huge reward for his capture.

They should offer 1 cent.

The big reward just sends the message that is very important that we find and raises his profile, when in the current situation he is pretty insignificant and his reward for capture should reflect that.

bry623

Perhaps the reward should be livestock.

ebackhus

A grenade with no pin would also suffice.

newhouse1390

I think you have said this before, and I will say what I said then, doesn't it seem like you last comment is a slap in the face to the troops that are fighting in Afghanistan right now (still hunting for UBL)?

What we are facing is so much bigger than just one guy, one group. or one country. We are really in the beginning stages of WWIII, 9/11 was our wakeup call. I think we have been woken up and we are taking action. While liberals still attack the President about the War in Iraq (War on Terror), there are groups joining in other regions of the world planning more attacks on the US. While you attack the President for taking too much action (War in Iraq), I will criticize him for not taking enough action (North Korea, Iran).

yustr

Good to hear from you again Newhouse, we missed you.

No disrepect of our troops is intended. It 's the Commander-in-Chief and those controlling the puppet strings that my comment is aimed. Do you think that OBL would be free today if the 130,000 troops that have been in Iraq for 3 1/2 years had been looking for him instead?

I saw a bumper sticker today. It said simply: “War is not working.” No condemnation of piss poor planning. No mention of slight of hand use of intelligence. No questioning priorities that abandoned the search for OBL for a war that didn't need to be waged.

Just the simple realization that Bush's method of solving problems has led to more suffering, more blood shed, more despair, more helplessness, more innocents murdered, more kids and soldiers placed in unfathomable situations of horror, moe instability, etc. It's not working. It will not work. It cannot work in the long run. There are not enough guns or missiles or sons and daughters to force a foreign will on peoples who do not want to hear.

Think about the last couple of weeks, Sudan,, Lebanon, Iraq, Somalia, Chetznia, Afghanistan, others? Thousands are suffering and dying. Where has Bush succeeded? What have threats done in N. Korea? Iran? I was amazed today to hear Sec. Rice say that the US does not support an immediate cease fire in Lebanon. What is our objection? Sure Hezbulah might not abide by it but isn't that the place to start? She certainly doesn't speak for me or I'd like to think the rest of the free thinking people in this country.

It's clear now that we have elected a bunch of warmongers who find it to easy to fight but hard to see peace. Sometimes the right thing to do is the toughest. But that doesn't make it any less right.

bruiser

Yustr, just who is it that is involved in everyone of those countries that you mentioned? Here's a clue: it's NOT the USA. It's the same people who brought us 9/11, and they mean to keep it up. They don't care who the President is, what party he belongs to, although I'm sure they'd rather have a dem in office, as they can do things a lot easier. They don't have to worry about any real retaliation with a leftie in office.

Now Yustr, you start naming all of those peace agreements the militant Muslims have signed off on, and then abided by. You can just name one. That just might be why the Bush Administration is in no hurry to call for an immediate cease fire. They intend for Israel to teach Hezbollah a lesson, but Hezbollah, just like the other miltant Muslim groups will not learn, and sooner or later there will be a fight to the finish, and the problem will be solved after one side or the other wins. I hope Israel crushes them.

yustr

But Bush declared himself Sheriff of the World so he now has to keep the peace. He has a warped idea that killing people will lead to peace. It won't. It will only lead to more killings.

There's an old Arabic saying "You may kill me but my great great grand son will kill your great great grand son." So no, nothing will be "solved'. Just alot of people will be dead.

bruiser

Bush hasn't declared himself sheriff of the world, but it might be a good idea if he did, because the useless UN sure won't do anything. Bush recognizes the muslim terrorist movement only respects one thing: strength. And I noticed you showed me all the peace agreements the muslim extremists have lived up to. Now, how many was that? If you can show me where the muslim fanatics really, really, really want peace, and to leave Israel alone, then you might have a point, but until that time all the talk in the world will not solve the problem, and the killing will continue until one side wins. That's the way it is. You may not like it, but that's the reality of the situation, unless you really, really, really want Sheriff Bush to send in a posse to all those countries, then you'd be whining and crying that Bush is sending more troops into places we don't have any business.

newhouse1390

While you may want to criticize the President for what you believe is a mistake. It is our troops that are carrying out the day to day missions in Iraq, not the commander in chief. While you might be right if we had more troops in Afghanistan we might have a better chance of finding him, but I think we did good in protecting our nation’s security by eliminating a threat to our country and allies.

This may be a bumper sticker that supports your exhausted and warped way of thinking, but to me that is nothing short of idiotic. I always tell myself “We have to protect the idiots too.”

All of the activity that you see in the world today is happening not because of what President Bush has done, but because of something called Islamic fascism. Clearly, it is in our best interest to make sure Israel succeeds in taking out one of the most dangerous terrorist groups in the world. I don’t look at the situation going on now as something that the President has done to cause. I think that we as a nation let these small countries get weaker and weaker (from the time after the Cold War) and eventually they got overrun by terrorists. That is what has happened in Lebanon. Al solemn government that is so weak they have let themselves become overrun by terrorists. That is why it annoys me to no end when people say we have no business in the region. That is so wrong. It is in our best interest to strengthen third world countries. Freedom is the way to do it, and that is what we are doing. We, being the world’s only superpower cannot help everybody, which is no excuse for helping nobody.

bry623

I think a better word would be ignorant.

If we provide a precense in this part of the region, then other countries might get with the program.

MisterEd

You are right about that. The reason why there is so much turmoil now is because people like the leader of North Korea and Iran are having tantrums because Bush is not kissing their tails.

In the past when the likes of such bullies made a lot of noise everyone ran to them and asked how much money will it take for them to be nice. For example the last time North Korea started his **** Bill Clinton had to pay him $1 billion of our tax dollars to satisfy him. All he had to do was promise not to build nuclear weapons. Was did that get us? North Korea is back making more noise than ever and will in a few years have a long range missile and a nuclear war head to put on it.

daminox

lol everyone is afraid of nuclear missles these days. Go watch "War Games" (1983), then tell me how afraid you are of North Korea's nuclear missles. You'd have to literally be born without a brain to launch a single ICBM in this day and age. I'd even bet money that every ICBM created in the past and in the future will rot in it's silo, waiting for someone else to shoot first. No one's that stupid.

And if you've already seen the movie, heres a refresher:

David Lightman: [to Joshua, a supercomputer] Come on. Learn, goddammit.
Joshua: [after computing and playing out all possible outcomes for Global Thermonuclear War] Greetings, Professor Falken.
Stephen Falken: Hello, Joshua.
Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

grizzly_uk

The issue of whether or not Hezbollah is actually a terrorist group or not is still on the table and shouldn't be dismissed. America, Britain and Israel all officially recognise them as a terrorist organisation. The UN and European Union does not however.

The US views them as a terrorist group for their actions against the marines in the 80s, the UK views them as terrorists because they kidnapped some British and Irish citizens, and well Israel views them as terrorists because they got in their way when they invaded lebanon.

But all of these acts were in a response to foreign countries placing troops in their country. By that same merit, the american militia who fought off the british and claimed independance for america were terrorists. It is a very confusing state of affairs with more sides to it than a rubix cube.

If America had an army that was not good enough to defend the country from an invading force from canada (that would be the day) wouldn't you expect american citizens to form an armed group to do the job the army could not?

newhouse1390

But that is not the case with Hezbollah, they have no merit, they do not have any objective other than to kill Israelis. Tell we what targets Hezbollah has hit that were of military importance. Hezbollah is recognized as a terrorist organization by the UN. They (UN) has ordered Hezbollah to disarm, no action has been taken. So now Israel is taking action and they should fully disarm and destroy Hezbollah.

grizzly_uk

Requestion that an armed faction disarms does not automatically mean they are terrorists...it simply means that the UN feels they shouldn't exist in the first place legally. As for Hezbollah only targeting civilian areas...they are using Katyusha rockets...all you can do is aim in the general direction and hope for the best, israel uses laser guided ordnance, what is there excuse when they hit more civilian targets (particularly kids) than military ones?

If hezbollah is destroyed, as you put it, then lebanon has nothing standing between it and Israeli dominance.

bry623

I believe that the Israleis just want to live in peace. With Hezbollah removed, they will not pressure Leabnon.

grizzly_uk

Generally speaking, the typical everyday civilian of every country wants peace. Those who are in power want no such thing...the kind of characteristics that draw people into positions of power include ego, narcissism and self-progression. The great leaders fulfil their hierarchy of needs by creating a country with a strong economy, happy citizens and low unemployment...the other 99% of leaders take the easier option, conflict.

In times of crisis people want the leader who has the nachos to 'take action' with 'shows of force' and all those other cliches. Churchill was one, so is Bush. But without conflict these types of leaders don't do too well, Churchill went from hero to zero after the war..infact all within the same year of 1945!

With Bush this is even more important as the role of the President is fairly weak at home, the office's strength lies in foreign affairs...the president isn't even a member of congress!

Wait, I am coming back to my point, I vered off momentarily. What I am saying is that I agree with you bry, the Israeli people want peace...but those in power are preying on this desire and that enables them to make war in the name of peace. I wish I could say Israel was an anomalie but most countries are like this/ have been like this. Without conflict a country loses its position in world affairs.