Have you not figured out that this is impossible. It's like saying lets wipe out every roach on the planet. There will always be more terrorist to take the place of the one's you just bombed. You can only defend as good as you can and go on with life. Policing the world is like throwing money down a bottomless pit. It's not something that will make this country stronger. Also, there are terrorist from all back grounds not just Muslim. It's a small minded approach to simply say lets wipe them all out by carpet bombing.

no i dont think we do. I could be wrong but i believe we r in uae and qatar. No longer in saudi. We have infrastructure there

The 64 AEG is in Saudi I believe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64th_Ai...itionary_Group

Shocked that it's a democrat's fault.

ok i stand corrected. 64th aeg is still there a total of 300 people. the majority of our assets were moved elsewhere. its a minor minor fraction of what we had there in 91.

i did not make it a democrat or republican issue. but the fact is we could have killed bin laden when his entire organization was less than 100 ppl. it just happened that clinton was in office. i dont care who was in office it was a mistake. does anybody disagree with this?

i never said carpet bomb we hardly ever carpet bomb as it is. once we get the total numbers down to a manageable level it will be easier to maintain and we dont have to invade countries to do this.

also there are more than muslim terrorists out there that are issues.

Did Leo ever answer the question whether or not the actions/presence of our military in the middle east makes recruitment for terrorists easier or harder?

Who cares. We have to be there to protect our freedom. Freedom meaning oil.

wookie my point about hitler as it relates to bin laden was not the fact that he vilified the jews, as he most certainly did. but that the final solution was not drafted till 1942 many years after he took over the nazi party and came to power. i would take a pretty good guess that the majority of german citizens did not know about the death camps and mass killings and neither did the majority of the people in the german military.
hence his ultimate goals were one thing he said another.

also would you concede that a lot of the people that are recruited by these organizations may not be the most educated and even if they are that they might be getting misinformation in their schools? a personal example is when i lived in japan the girls i dated all educated and successful did not know that japan started ww2. they had no idea that pearl harbor was an attack without aggression. multiple other little first hand examples i can give with this.

well it didnt stop them from recruiting for 21 years before the gulf war. and the fact is this policy is working to the point that by taking the fight to them in their backyard (something they never thought we would do. they have always seen us as pussies because we typically dont do anything after attacks) has kept us from being attacked since in our backyard.

Yeah the recruiters are making all sorts of **** up like that we are targeting funerals and people giving aid to the wounded with our drones. Those uneducated rubes stumble over themselves to join.

Answe the question. Now that we've "shown them we're no pussies" by taking the fight to their funerals, backyard bar b ques, and rescuers, is it making recruiting easier or harder for them?

We had been meddling in Middle Eastern affairs long before Gulf War I.

See: Israel, Shah Pahlavi, support of Saddam before opposition of Saddam, and more.

.

money those were isolated incidents and it has been stated by others that we really dont have 100% of the facts to know exactly what happened.

also if you think im all for random killing of innocents you are gravely mistaken.

but reality in my opinion is this if i knew my brother was a terrorist i wouldnt see him. just like if i knew my brother was a witness against the mafia i wouldnt be walking down the street with him or let him stay in my house cause there are ppl who want him dead and i might get hit by mistake

Uh huh, and do you think assassinating Bin Laden back then would have been legal under the laws as they were?

Hi Brick Wall,

The term terrorist is subjective. Were the colonials fighting the British terrorists?

Would you disown your brother if he was fighting a foreign occupier? Would you consider him a terrorist still?

Pretend we're invaded by Brazil and your brother has taken up the fight. Would you;

1) Respect his balls of steel and stay at home
2) Join him
3) Distance yourself and take the moral high ground by embracing the foreign enemy?

wookie do you have a problem with our support of israel? sadam was unfortunately at the time lesser of 2 evils.

the shah was good guy and well like by his people. we didnt put him in power the brits and soviets did.

dodger i define terrorist as one who purposely targets civilians.
i do not consider the uss cole a terrorist act. i consider that an act of war.
if brazil invaded the us and my brother fought them i wouldnt have an issue. if he went to brazil and bombed a night club or a school or a shopping center i would consider him a coward and fully deserving of whatever happened to him.
embasy bombing terror. attack on ft benning not so much.

I think it was legal for the CIA assassinate in the 90's. You feel otherwise?

legal or illegal it was justified. the same as if a father went out and killed a man that raped and killed his child. i would never put that guy in jail if i was on a jury even if it was illegal.

would you have killed bin laden? the guy that didnt said if he had known how right he was he would have done despite the order not to.

Do you think that U.S. citizens "allowed 9/11 terrorists safe haven" in the U.S?


How young are you? Have you been to many funerals? Did you know everyone there, and know who was showing up prior to going? Because I've been to many funerals, and I've never known everyone that was going to be present.

Plus if they truly are innocent citizens, then they won't know who is and is not a terrorist.

It's like you think every person who isn't a U.S. citizen is a terrorist, and knows every other terrorist.

well zippy considering that neither of us know exactly what happened. i am just going to make a guess. would you say it is possible that these funerals we attacked were funerals of terrorists? that they were attended by terrorists? and since we know that at least in pakistan 20 innocents were killed which as i stated is awful. this was over multiple funerals.
is it then possible that the size of each funeral was small and if it was a terrorist attended by terrorist and u might be only 1 of 2 non terrorists that you could figure it out?

Yeah, because it was only a mistake in the same sense that not writing down the right lotto numbers last week was a mistake.
You are fine with innocents getting killed as collateral damage in pursuit of certain objectives. I mean, that's not a problem, because everyone is if the the expected number of killed innocents is favourable in comparison to the scenario where the objectives aren't pursued.

What's disturbing is the innocents/terrorists killed ratio you and like minded people seem to be ok, how you define "terrorist" and that you selectively invoke uncertainty to go like "but maybe those in attendance were terrorists too" and "and we don't know for sure what happened".

i think it also ridiculous for some left leaning folks to think that somebody who is anti terror is anti Muslim. only an idiot would think all muslims are terrorists and that all terrorists are muslim.
pablo escabar was a drug dealer but his actions definitely elevated him to terrorist. his entire motivation was money. others its political. some theological. and others maybe just insanity.

Most people ITT don't think you're anti-Muslim. They think you're shortsighted about how the prosecution of the war on terror affects terrorist recruitment of Muslims who wouldn't otherwise be interested in terrorism, but all of a sudden start hating the US after we murder their families and friends in a drone strike on a funeral.