Everyone stop doing personal attacks! It's tiresome. Talk about the topic on hand. Give credit where credit is due, and stop bringing up old threads that have nothing to do with this one. Talk about information that has come out from OBL Sources or government sources, talk about failures and successes of certain administrations that are pertaining to this topic. If someone believes something, post something relevant to refute the oppositions points, it's very simple. I have faith in all of you!
First, the attacks were just soft enough not to justify taking it to the next level of invading a Middle Eastern country, which had all kinds of negative political problems with it. The Arab countries would go ballistic claiming it was a pretext. Nobody could say that after 9/11.
Second, bin Laden was still an individual, and it's hard for us to hit him. Once he got firmly entangled with the Taliban, though, he was much more a state actor with a military force to engage. We could use military force against that.
The mistake the critics are making is looking at our tools and thinking the biggest, most aggressive tool (military action) is the best or most effective one. It may have made us feel good to invade somebody, but it didn't mean it was wise at the time.
You know what. Your strawman has failed.
I also quote this guy as well.. Used to start threads to discuss.
The Future of Terrorism: What al-Qaida Really Wants - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
See when the enemy tells you something, you should listen. What would his motivation be for lying in this case?
Last edited by ReverendHellh0und; 04-27-10 at 10:33 AM.
Matthew 10:34Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Also, keep in mind Mister, that people were fed up with these attacks. Even before 9/11, people wanted something done. How many more attacks would OBL have done if we had not reacted as hard as we did? How many more American Embassies, naval vessels, airline hijackings, terminal hijacks, Olympic games, suicide bombers, attempted political assassinations would these terrorist groups do before these "soft" attacks became too common? You may call them "soft" attacks and I understand what you mean, but these families that lost loved ones I guarantee you do not refer to them as "soft" attacks. American civilians and servicemen still died. Now maybe you could suggest that we work behind the scenes with Delta Force, Army Rangers, Seals, Green Berets etc... and maybe you are right that this would have been more effective, truly though, I doubt we will ever know. I would love to talk more but I have a test in a couple hours on Juvenile Justice, and I need to get a 80+ on the exam. I'll be back on here later though.
Agreed.OBL is not stupid, a very well educated man. He understood that those attacks listed were as you say "soft" or possibly not enough to warrant a full on attack by American forces. He assumed he could bump it up a notch and see how far he could push the United States, and he lost that gamble. He did not think we would invade, we did and crushed the Taliban and pushed back Al Q. severely decimating his forces. That is what we are discussing but, very good points.