straight news from the front

[Michael Tee]

<<"They " have never said that they have this limitation on their ambition.>>

I've read numerous accounts of Resistance fighters who took up the gun in response to a specific grievance, such as Palestine, Chechnya, the invasion of Iraq, the establishment of U.S. bases in Saudi Arabia, etc.  Without any logical justification, you claim a wider goal for each of them.  Pure projection (THEY want world domination, when in fact that goal is way more consistent with U.S. actions than with anything most of the Resistance fighters ever said - - but the Israel Lobby keeps a huge amount of "scholars" on its gravy train, combing through every speech of every lunatic, looking for the magic words "global jihad" or "global Sharia" so that the U.S. military-industrial complex and its media claque can happily serve up the results of all this research to "prove" that "They're out to get us" when every objective fact points to relentless exploitation, subversion, interference and ultimately invasion BY THE WEST of Muslim lands, going on for decades, ever since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.)

<<Why do they attack the USA at all , if their real aim is more local?>>

Why bomb Cambodia if the real aim is Viet Nam?  Why bomb Germany when you want to liberate Occupied Europe?  Why shoot for the head of the dragon when it's his claws that are going to rip you to shreds?

<<The Shah of Iran was deposed without burning down downtown New York , so why does such a thing help them take over Saudi Arabia?>>

Later day, better tactics.  They're starting to get their shit together.  In the Vietnam years, the idea was "Bring the  War Home!" meaning that as long as war meant that Vietnamese children would be roasted to death in napalm while New Yorkers sipped lattes on West 57th Street, the American people would tolerate the war forever.  Once things started to blow up in America, the people would start asking questions about the war that they should have started asking years before.

Now the war on the Muslims and the theft of their resources is starting to cost America big-time.  I'm not talking about the 4,000 dead hillbillies nobody but their families will ever miss - - I'm talking three trillion bucks and counting plus the cost of "Homeland Security" and the loss of American prestige around the world.  IMHO, the al Qaeda tactic has already succeeded brilliantly by raising the cost of American aggression exponentially.  Which was the theory behind "Bring the War Home!"

[Xavier_Onassis]

Al Qaeda has not invaded the US.
It has attacked the US.

How can one tell the difference?
This is relatively easy.
Identify all territories currently held by Al Qaeda (0)
Add all territories held temporarily bu Al Qaeda:  (0)
Add the two above:                                       (0)

Number of invasions of US by Al Qaeda: (0)   

Conclusion: Al Qaeda has not, ever invaded the US.

                                               

[Michael Tee]

plane sez:  <<Osama Bin Laden is who would have thunk that he could win a quagmire sort of war , that is who.

<<He wanted it and he was gonna do whatever it took to get it to happen.

<<OBL was a very wealthy guy , what does a very welthy guy buy a nation load of weapons for?>>

=========================================================================

I think you totally missed my point.  Those stockpiles of weapons are nothing out of the ordinary for Afghanistan.  That's how they decide their political differences.  It's like finding a warehouse full of McCain for President posters in the U.S.   You wanted to make that look like some kind of sinister plot by Muslim fanatics to take over the world.   And I'll eat my hat if every weapons cache found in Afghanistan belongs to OBL.  (Safe bet, I don't have a hat.)

[Michael Tee]

<<Totally right , we are going to win.

<<The only question is how long will it take?>>

Well, not the ONLY question.  The other one is, How low does the dollar have to fall before one of the morons-in-charge decides that "winning" is beyond your financial reach?

<<If we destroy Al Quieda , we are done , nothing less can be called finished.>>

The biggest fucking joke to date.  As if no other group will spring up to replace them.

<<If we do the job mostly and retire from the feild we will be forced to return in a few years when the Al Queda has healed up .>>

TRANSLATION:  This fight that we started will go on forever till somebody decides to pull the plug on it.

<<If this becomes cyclical , how many iterations of the cycle will we go thru before we get serious ?>>
 
Getting serious about what?  About pursuing the impossible or about admitting a huge mistake, taking your losses and finally bugging out like you always do?

<<Imagine the Allies decideing that driveing Facism form their own territorys was enough to do , and halting their advance at Germanys frounteirs.   That would have saved many, many lives , right?>>

Conveniently forgetting that the Germans were totally in the wrong and most of them were prepared to acknowledge that fact and give up an aggressive and hateful ideology and admit their crimes and their errors.  Now considering that the Arab Resistance is mostly in the right, fighting off foreign invasions and totally unprovoked aggression and desiring to remain masters in their own house, having committed no crimes that would disentitle them to that right, they will keep on fighting as long as they can draw breath.

Ask yourself:  How come the Germans and Japs gave up and accepted the occupation?  How come the Afghans and the Iraqis don't?

Your WWII comparisons are just loony and the exact opposite of reality-based.  You have got to be able to distinguish between the two situations.  There is zero similarity.  In WWII, we were the good guys.  Today you are the bad guys.  NOBODY rolls over for the bad guys, no matter how powerful they are.  Just as the European Resistance kept on fighting the Nazis against impossible odds, the same way the Islamic Resistance will go on fighting the Americans.  That is the glory and the heroism of the human spirit - - not to give in, to continue the fight.  That is why I KNOW that you will be defeated in the long run.  Evil never wins.

[fatman]

It's my opinon that the "War on Terror" will never end, its focus may shift from international to domestic, but I don't think that you're ever going to see a Mission Accomplished banner for this war.  The war won't end for the same reason that you'll never see an end to the "War on Drugs":  it has become a cash cow for the government, and a very powerful tool for securing convictions.  Yes, right now those convictions are for terrorists, but does anyone really believe that the law won't be abused in the future?  The government has a tool that lets it extend its will over its populace, and extort money in the bargain.

Do you really think that they'll ever let that go (and I think that this is an equal application to both parties)?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Terrorism is a tool. The CIA and the OSS before it have schooled terrorists.
The OSS schooled terrorists in the French Maquis to defeat the Nazis, and some of them were involved in organized crime in Marsailles and Corsica and that evolved into the French Connection.

Something similar happened in Italy. The US Mafia was largely separate from its Italian roots until after WWII.

The Muslim Brotherhood was financed and encouraged by a CIA guy named Copeland to dethrone Nasser. Eventually it managed to assassinate Sadat. Israel clandestinely encouraged Hamas to provide an opposition for the PLO and Al Fatah.

Al Qaeda was formed when the US got Saudi help and provided arms to the Afghans to fight the Soviets.

The pattern is that the US brings organizational skills and arms to incompetent dissidents, who then become competent, armed and dangerous.

Much of this worked for the US for a period, but then stupidity and incompetence allowed it to backfire on us.

[Plane]

It's my opinon that the "War on Terror" will never end, its focus may shift from international to domestic, but I don't think that you're ever going to see a Mission Accomplished banner for this war.  The war won't end for the same reason that you'll never see an end to the "War on Drugs":  it has become a cash cow for the government, and a very powerful tool for securing convictions.  Yes, right now those convictions are for terrorists, but does anyone really believe that the law won't be abused in the future?  The government has a tool that lets it extend its will over its populace, and extort money in the bargain.

Do you really think that they'll ever let that go (and I think that this is an equal application to both parties)?

There was a war on Piracy , it took a long time.

 Pirates were good hiders on a large ocean.

Pirates had homes and sponsors they could go to , some retired as gentry.

But Pirates have been a joke for an hundred years why is quashing Pirates so easy and terrorists so tough?

I would bet that if you were to ask Queen Elizabeth how Piracy would be abolished she could not have told you , no idea.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I would bet that if you were to ask Queen Elizabeth how Piracy would be abolished she could not have told you , no idea.
=================================
Queen Elizabeth was pro-pirate, and financed a whole bunch of them: Morgan, Raleigh, and others. The Brits had no gold, and for a rather long period English money consisted mostly of foreign coins, usually Spanish coins, with QE's face stamped over the Spanish King's visage. The English built ships and sent their sailors off to pillage and plunder the Spanish. French and others in return for a percentage of the take.  If a pirate got too greedy, or the Queen signed a trweaty, she would betray her privateer and have him captured and hung. The various European royalty were less honorable as a rule than the pirates they hired.

Just as the English privateers, Dutch freibuiters, French boucaniers often shed their loyalties and atacked the faithless monarchs they once sailed for, the  OSS and the CIA started the whole terrorism thing during and after WWII, and it got out of hand and resulted in blowback. Queen Elizabeth and her court of plunderers and thieves were remarkably like the asshole Dulles Brothers and the unspeakable William Casey, who financed coups and terrorist groups galore.

It is unlikely that there would have been any 9-11 had it not been for the downright evil machinations of men like the Dulleses, Casey, and their numerous blackops clowns and flunkies.

[Michael Tee]

<<It is unlikely that there would have been any 9-11 had it not been for the downright evil machinations of men like the Dulleses, Casey, and their numerous blackops clowns and flunkies.>>

Or as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright loved to say, "The chickens came home to roost."  And some Americans just can't stand to hear the truth.  But it sure looks like more and more of them are coming to grips with it.

[Plane]

Al Qaeda has not invaded the US.
It has attacked the US.

How can one tell the difference?
This is relatively easy.
Identify all territories currently held by Al Qaeda (0)
Add all territories held temporarily bu Al Qaeda:  (0)
Add the two above:                                       (0)

Number of invasions of US by Al Qaeda: (0)   

Conclusion: Al Qaeda has not, ever invaded the US.

                                               

Number of invasions of US by Al Qaeda: (4)

Look at all of those Zeros we agree on , no territory held at all.

This is a good definition of looseing.