PDA

View Full Version : OBL?..............who cares!



Qtec
02-24-2007, 09:24 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Army chief of staff shares views on finding bin Laden

By CHRIS VAUGHN
STAR-TELEGRAM STAFF WRITER

FORT WORTH -- The Army's highest-ranking officer and the former leader of the secretive world of Special Operations offered his thoughts on the importance of capturing or killing Osama bin Laden during a luncheon Friday.

They're probably not what anyone expected.

"I don't know whether we'll find him," said Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff. "I don't know that it's all that important, frankly."

Schoomaker, pulled out of retirement in 2003 to lead the Army, pointed to the capture of Saddam Hussein, the killings of his sons, Uday and Qusay, and the killing of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as evidence that bin Laden's capture or death would have little effect on the threats to the United States.

"So we get him, and then what?" Schoomaker said. "There's a temporary feeling of goodness, but in the long run, we may make him bigger than he is today. He's hiding, and he knows we're looking for him. We know he's not particularly effective. I'm not sure there's that great of a return" on capturing or killing bin Laden.

Then Schoomaker moved to the next question from the audience at the Rotary Club of Fort Worth. As a result, it is not possible to know fully what Schoomaker's position is or whether there is a more nuanced view he didn't share.

But his comments would put him in rare company in this country, according to the chairman of the history department at the University of North Texas and a former Army infantry officer.

"I don't think the vast majority of American people would agree with him," said Adrian Lewis, the author of a new book, The American Culture of War. "They want that son of a bitch. For overall effect, General Schoomaker may be right. If we kill Osama, al Qaeda is not going to go away.

"But my own estimate is that there would be considerable psychological and morale benefits, not just for the American people but for our credibility around the world, if we captured Osama."

<hr /></blockquote>

GW has also expressed the same feeling, WHICH I FIND KIND OF STRANGE. /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
I don't understand this kind of thinking. I would have thought capturing OBL would be assignment No 1. ie the FIRST priority!
Here is a guy that [ that the Govt says ] is responsible for the deaths of 3,000 people inside the US and the destruction of the 2 tallest buildings in the USA -situated in the heart of American power,ie Manhatten New York!
IMO, if you say OBL is not important you need your head examined!
If OBL can get away with 9/11 it can only embolden other Al Q members. Don't you think?


Long ago I predicted that GW would never capture OBL. He might be a terrorist but he is STILL part of the Saudi Royal family. They would never allow a heathen to execute one of their own. A deal has been done. /ccboard/images/graemlins/ooo.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Lets not forget that the US invaded Afgahnistan because the Taliban wouldn't give up OBL!............and then he quickly became a side-line.
The Govt rhetoric changed from nuclear weapons and OBL to WMD,s and Al Q. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
SoNoMa, do YOU have an opinion? /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Q

Dagwood
02-24-2007, 11:38 PM
I happen to agree with General Schoomaker. I don't agree that OBL is un-important...quite the opposite. But I do think that killing or capturing him would make life more dangerous for my fellow soldiers overseas and for Americans in general. In killing him, or having him die in captivity, you martyr him in the eyes of the radical islamists out there. IMHO, letting him die of whatever ailments are out there is the way to go. In the meantime, take his infastructure out from around him and make him that much more ineffective.

To answer your points, would killing/capturing him appease the public? Absolutely. Does the public as a whole look to the future or concentrate on the now? Most likely the latter, and they won't realize until after the kill rate for the insurgents skyrocket that it may have been a mistake. And even then, they may not. A person is an intelligent, logical (for the most part), and realistic animal. People en mass is a unlogical, emotional, dangerous, and impossible to please thing that is only concerned with what is happening now, not the long term. Just my 2 cents...

Dags

Sid_Vicious
02-25-2007, 02:15 AM
"Long ago I predicted that GW would never capture OBL. He might be a terrorist but he is STILL part of the Saudi Royal family."

Q...I always knew that Bush WANTED that guy to be out there to scare us, and that was the reason GW did not urgently pursue the sob in the mountains of tora bora. Any a-hole hired to protect this country who would fly the BL family out when all the airspace was closed down, is merely a traitor. "SOME" patriots here who continues to defend the chimp, seriously...we ain't got nothing in a leader, but for and sellout to our interests. sid

Rich R.
02-25-2007, 06:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> I always knew that Bush WANTED that guy to be out there to scare us, and that was the reason GW did not urgently pursue the sob in the mountains of tora bora. <hr /></blockquote>
I'm sure that the freedom of OBL translates into a substantial amount of cash in the military budget. If they captured or killed him, they would have to justify that money in some other way. In the eyes of GWB and the military machine, it does not benefit them to find OBL. They are probably sorry they found SH in that hole.

Gayle in MD
02-25-2007, 07:10 AM
If he isn't important, then why is Bush still quoting him in his fear mongering speeches?

I'm with you, Q. I suppose capturing bL might fly in the face of the formally promoted idea that Saddam was the pressing threat. Wouldn't matter how many of them we killed or captured, it's all just a cover for Cheney's Secret Oil Deals.

IMO, everyone under estimates bL. He may have to use carriers, instead of his cell phone, these days, but anyone who thinks he isn't still planning with, and leading his followers in their next attack, here in our country, must have also bought into this idiotic idea that America could go into Iraq and turn it into a peaceful democracy. The fact that Bush's policies have given birth to dozens of new bin Ladens, doesn't for one moment distract this maniac, I'm quite sure. No doubt, our supposed great friends, the Saudis, another joke, played a hand in the non capture of bin Laden. The absurdity of the statements that come out of this administration is mind boggling!

Gayle in Md.

Bobbyrx
02-25-2007, 11:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> "Long ago I predicted that GW would never capture OBL. He might be a terrorist but he is STILL part of the Saudi Royal family." <font color="blue"> The Saudi government has said that the family signed a statement officially disowning Osama in 1994. The Saudi government also stripped Osama bin Laden of his citizenship, for publicly speaking out against them, after they permitted U.S. troops to be based in Saudi Arabia in preparation for the 1991 Gulf War.
</font color>

Q...I always knew that Bush WANTED that guy to be out there to scare us, and that was the reason GW did not urgently pursue the sob in the mountains of tora bora. Any a-hole hired to protect this country who would fly the BL family out when all the airspace was closed down, is merely a traitor. <font color="blue">If you believe Michael Moore's B.S....it was all cleared by the F.B.I. who suggested they leave for fear of reprisals against them </font color> "SOME" patriots here who continues to defend the chimp, seriously...we ain't got nothing in a leader, but for and sellout to our interests. sid <hr /></blockquote> <font color="blue">Then why did Clinton not take him when OBL was offered to him ?</font color>

Gayle in MD
02-26-2007, 08:35 AM
Tap Tap Tap...
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
"SOME" patriots here who continues to defend the chimp, seriously...we ain't got nothing in a leader, but for and sellout to our interests. sid

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

And the same types, refer to belief in statements made by Saudi Arabia, LMAO, same country that is sending in financial help to the Sunni's terrorists in Iraq, to assist them in slaughtering our troops.

Martin, the only thing that compares to the die hard Bush supporters, is the OJ jury. Same mentality, grasp at every ridiculous straw, confuse the issues, cover up the facts, suspend all reasonable debate, demonize any witness to the obvious reality.

Gayle in Md.

hondo
02-26-2007, 10:10 AM
Well, guys, I think the General is partially right.
What does it change? NOTHING! Make him into a martyr?
Probably.
One thing it would do for the American people is give
us some closure. We demand OBL's blood.
The general made the mistake of saying exactly what
he believes and there's no place for that in America.

eg8r
02-26-2007, 10:15 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Well, guys, I think the General is partially right.
What does it change? NOTHING! Make him into a martyr?
Probably.
One thing it would do for the American people is give
us some closure. <hr /></blockquote> I absolutely agree. While it won't really change the world we live in, positively or negatively, it is still great to see someone get what they deserve.

eg8r

Sid_Vicious
02-26-2007, 11:31 AM
Given time, BL will claim another strike here, and THEN ask everyone this same question. BL's following will exponentiate. Yea, it is impottant to get him, which is why we should have centralized in Afganistan, and damn sure not have flown out all of the BL family following 911 before thoroughly questioning all of them, as with any criminal situation. Something stinks, and I still believe that Bush has more of a fear card to play with BL still out there to scare us...sid

Gayle in MD
02-26-2007, 01:35 PM
Hi Hondo, /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif check it out... /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
These people are going to detonate a nuclear device inside the United States ... and we're going to have no one to blame but ourselves." -- Michael Scheuer, former head of the C.I.A.'s bin Laden unit, to MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, February 19, 2007
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
Remember how you watched Richard Clarke testifying before Congress in 2004 and wished his warnings had been taken seriously in 2001?

Well, it's déjà vu all over again. The people who know what's going on - the experts who have no hidden agendas beyond sounding alarms and getting the truth out - are frightened. And if they're frightened, so should we be.


George W. Bush (and Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld and all of their minions) should have been taken out and publicly flogged the day that their failure to act on the C.I.A.'s "Bin Laden Determined To Strike Inside U.S." memo was revealed. Not only did this not happen (though it's such a pleasant fantasy), but there was NO OUTRAGE on the part of anyone in a position to point out how unacceptable it was that 3,000 people died a month after those who might very well have been able to prevent their deaths chose instead to shrug off the warnings and continue their summer vacations.


At a press conference on March 13th, 2002, Bush was asked why he'd stopped talking about bin Laden. "I just don't spend that much time on him," he said. "I truly am not that concerned about him." So, a mere six months after the worst attack ever launched against the country it was (and is) his main job to protect, Bush was "not that concerned" that its mastermind was still at large. And did this cavalier statement lead the evening newscasts? Did CNN devote days to it like they just did to the question of the paternity of Anna Nicole Smith's kid? Did the Democrats make even an infinitesimal fraction of the noise that Republicans made about Clinton's blow jobs? No, no, and, of course, no. The statement made no impact on the public consciousness, and Bush was allowed to continue to claim that he was keeping us safe while, with each passing day, he was increasingly putting us in the greatest danger we've ever known.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
From an article by...
Paul Slansky



Since these statements were made, by our former bin Laden/al Qaeda expert, Mr. Scheuer, five Generals and Admirals have threatened to resign if Bush pushes us into an attack against Iran. Once again, sources are saying that the intelligence presently being used by Bush regarding Iran, is flawed.

Also, present National Security Estimates still insist that bin Laden, alQaeda, is this country's greatest nuclear threat, and that al Qaeda is regrouping in Afghanistan. Additionally, Bush continues to expand the numbers of Iraqi, (at least we will think they are Iraqi) refugees allowed to come here, and disregard our open borders. Iraq wasn't a training ground for al Qaeda, until we occupied it. Now, we not only fight al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq, but they are few compared to those sent in by Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Iraqis themselves who kill our soldiers. And in the midst of this, Cheney is out there suggesting that Great Britian's decision to begin withdrawing their troops, is proof of success, while Tony Blair's party is being dumped over his original decision to support the Bush policies. Unbelievable!

Anyone who isn't doing everything they can do to stop this madman in the White House, including Democrats, and H. Clinton, McCain, Leiberman, Guiliani and every single one of us in this country, will live to regret it, imo. Iraq will continue to be a blood bath, with our troops, or without them.


Gayle in Md.