Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. nesman89's Avatar
    Posts
    5 Posts
    Global Posts
    6 Global Posts
       #1  
    here is the link http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/22/osama.poll/index.html

    Or to you conspiracy theorists when do we attack ourselves again. Let me guess 1 month before elections.


    discuss
  2. #2  
    The boogie man is always out to get you.

    boogie boogie boogie!!!

    Rule by fear you cowards!
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by nesman89 View Post
    Let me guess 1 month before elections.
    I find it funny when I hear people throw this up, I mean like they really believe it, that they are convinced that the Bush Admin/Reps are planning on trouble just prior to the election for the sole reason that they feel it will help them remain in power...(Nesman this is not directed at you)
    .....as if this exact same scenario of of terrorist attacks days before a national election doesn't have recent historical precedence, aka March 11th, 2004 with Spain's election the following Sunday. Responsibility for the 3 trains being attacked with coordination has ranged from ETA (which most agree has largely been discarded), AQ (which questions still falls on both sides of this option), or as Judge Del Olmo assigns the responsibility to "local cells of Islamic extremists inspired through the Internet" with support from a captured AQ cell.

    The point is, I think it IS a real possibility. And I think it is despicable when politicians play politics with events that could possibly kill thousands of American lives. And I mean this on both sides of the fence....Repub playing up and stretching even the littlest of the possibility of potential evidence as Facts that an attack is imminent. And the Dems playing down and discarding as much evidence as possible to a possible threat of an attack.....or throwing out the Rep are calling Wolf conspiracy theories in light of real evidence of a threat because they feel it supports the Reps more than their own.
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/23/2006 at 11:34 AM.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The boogie man is always out to get you.

    boogie boogie boogie!!!

    Rule by fear you cowards!
    See....I guess Da just helped to prove one side of the points I just made in my last post. He posted while I writing mine.

    Sergeant Hans Schultz talking to himself comes to mind: "Oh, no. I don't see anything! I hear nothing, nothing!"
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/23/2006 at 11:33 AM.
  5. #5  
    The point is it's ALWAYS a possibility and always will be. That's why it's ongoing police work NOT a "war on terrror". Anyone who uses phrases like that are trying to manipulate the tragedy of 9-11 to their own means and I for one am sick of it. I think a lot of others are too and this will become apparent in November.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The point is it's ALWAYS a possibility and always will be. That's why it's ongoing police work NOT a "war on terrror". Anyone who uses phrases like that are trying to manipulate the tragedy of 9-11 to their own means and I for one am sick of it. I think a lot of others are too and this will become apparent in November.
    This raises an excellent distinction. There is the rhetoric--labels such as "the war on terror"--then there is the reality--the need for on-going police work.

    Unfortunately, our society seems to need good rhetoric a la a Label and Theme Music (remember "Wag the Dog"?) if it is to pay attention to reality.
  7. nesman89's Avatar
    Posts
    5 Posts
    Global Posts
    6 Global Posts
       #7  
    Hobbes,

    I was trying to be sarcastic with my 1 month statement. I figured Da would mention the boogie man.

    now my next question is.... isn't Al Qaeda fear mongering from their side by continually saying the U.S. wants to end Islam and ruin their way of life. to me it appears Bin Laden/AQ is pulling out all the politcal stops by inciting the local population therefore keeping themselves in power and control. why must the U.S. always be the bad guy. yet many people from foreign countries want to come here and use our education system live the American dream. we must be doing something right or no one would want to come here.
  8. #8  
    Nesman....No worries, I realized that you were not making that statement as your point view, which is why I wrote: ...(Nesman this is not directed at you)" But it was a good point I wanted to expound on.
  9. nesman89's Avatar
    Posts
    5 Posts
    Global Posts
    6 Global Posts
       #9  
    so to my next point. Does AQ have ulterior motives. Do they want to keep their people stirred up to maintain their "power grab" or do you think they truly believe in the cause they are espousing. sounds strikingly similar to what the left says about our country's current admin.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The point is it's ALWAYS a possibility and always will be. That's why it's ongoing police work NOT a "war on terrror". Anyone who uses phrases like that are trying to manipulate the tragedy of 9-11 to their own means and I for one am sick of it. I think a lot of others are too and this will become apparent in November.
    I am not necessarily talking about always a possibility......I was talking about both sides playing politics to inflate or deflate real intel based on a personal political agenda with no regard to the legitimacy or not of the real threat. Often times reacting before even knowing what the intel really is. For example a Rep hears a small piece of possibly intel and cries the sky is falling. Or a Dem hears of a warning based on a real and legitimate piece of intel and cries "Grab for power!".

    Police Work is a VERY important and hopefully the biggest component of the War on Terror, Fight Against Terrorists, Disagreement in Western / Israel Philosophy By Violent Means....or whatever you want to call it (so what do you call it?). But to limit it to only police work, limits the reality of the situation.

    As for the term War on Terror, it does seem appropriate as least since there is a Declaration of War against the US from AQ:

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...9&postcount=99

    And as with any war....or to avoid the term WAR I should say conflict between two armed identities with a Declaration of War from one side..... there is a large part of intel (aka police work) as well as military resources. Both play a very different role in very different circumstances. There are LOTS of situations where Police Work is the only way to go. But we should never disregard our options to use military resources when confronting terrorist organizations that are planning on killing us. You can argue all you want about how Bush has used the military resources in the WOT....oh, sorry...conflict between two armed identities with a Declaration of War from one side..... , but I think it is foolish to limit us to not to have it as a valid option as the opportunities arise for it's need.

    What gets me is when I see those who say it should only be Police Work.....as long as they don't monitor the phone records, we make sure that the public knows the details of monitoring the bank transactions, that the gov get a warrant prior to any wiretapping with intel with a 12 minute value, etc.....
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 08/23/2006 at 01:43 PM.

Posting Permissions