• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

Jack Hays said:
It was bin Laden's intention to attack us here. That remains the intention of his followers.
Click to expand...

For the purpose of drawing us over there. Quite thinking he was an idiot and had no larger view. So read a little closer what I said.
 
Jack Hays said:
The attack here was his objective.
Click to expand...


Again, it was a means to an end, only part of the objective. He wanted two things, for us to feel it and to get us to come over there. It is much easier for them to hurt us there than here.
 
Boo Radley said:
Again, it was a means to an end, only part of the objective. He wanted two things, for us to feel it and to get us to come over there. It is much easier for them to hurt us there than here.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but bin Laden and his cohorts were shocked to find us in Afghanistan. Especially shocked that we came so quickly. They expected bombing and cruise missiles, but they never expected a ground assault.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but bin Laden and his cohorts were shocked to find us in Afghanistan. Especially shocked that we came so quickly. They expected bombing and cruise missiles, but they never expected a ground assault.
Click to expand...

No they weren't. They were shocked Afghanistan put up so little resistance. Unfortunately for us, we gave them Iraq. I believe the author of Imperial Hubris called that a Christmas present to OBL.
 
Boo Radley said:
No they weren't. They were shocked Afghanistan put up so little resistance. Unfortunately for us, we gave them Iraq. I believe the author of Imperial Hubris called that a Christmas present to OBL.
Click to expand...

Iraq is a separate topic. You are simply wrong about Afghanistan.
 
Jack Hays said:
Iraq is a separate topic. You are simply wrong about Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. It's all part of the same story. True, OBL didn't count on Iraq, but he did count on us overreacting.
 
Jack Hays said:
We would probably have invaded Iraq even if there had been no 9/11. It's a separate topic.
Click to expand...

Then we'd have been more foolish than we were, but as it transpired, it's part of the same story. No probably to it.
 
Boo Radley said:
Then we'd have been more foolish than we were, but as it transpired, it's part of the same story. No probably to it.
Click to expand...


Wrong again. The invasion of Iraq had no relationship to 9/11 or our engagement in Afghanistan.
 
Jack Hays said:
Wrong again. The invasion of Iraq had no relationship to 9/11 or our engagement in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Jack. you have to work on your comprehension. As it was an overreaction to 9/11, it does. As it helped OBL's purpose, it does. Now stay within that context and try to answer.
 
Boo Radley said:
Jack. you have to work on your comprehension. As it was an overreaction to 9/11, it does. As it helped OBL's purpose, it does. Now stay within that context and try to answer.
Click to expand...

Iraq was in no way a reaction to 9/11, over or under.
 
Jack Hays said:
Iraq was in no way a reaction to 9/11, over or under.
Click to expand...

You are simply wrong. I'm not sure where you came up with that illogical idea, but it's simply wrong.
 
Boo Radley said:
You are simply wrong. I'm not sure where you came up with that illogical idea, but it's simply wrong.
Click to expand...

The GWB administration came into office intending to invade Iraq. That intention predated 9/11 by seven months.
 
Jack Hays said:
The GWB administration came into office intending to invade Iraq. That intention predated 9/11 by seven months.
Click to expand...

That is supposition, but meaningless. As it was an overreaction and did help OBL, the reality trumps any supposition on your part.
 
Jack Hays said:
I guess you just can't escape from your fantasy loop.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same of you. But you're not really addressing all I said. You're just stuck with something you think that is meaningless even if you're correct. You seem to completely miss what is being argued.
 
JUG said:
I recently came across this article of Samir Naji's 13 year incarceration at Gitmo. Obviously, this is a pretty convienent time for him to tell the tales of his cruel and unusual punishment. Which made me think; isn't that exactly what's being clamed here? Cruel and unusual punishment on United States territory. I've heard from my professor that an obvious consequence of closing Gitmo would be that if we brought these inmates back to the United States we would have to give them due-process. Well...I may be mistaken, but last time I checked, Guantanamo Bay is United states territory. I found it interesting how this man's story was written. Check it out if you wish to.

Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames U.S. flag - CNN.com
Click to expand...

Just an example of how evil our government is. We should have never fought our middle eastern wars of liberal expansionism.
 
Boo Radley said:
Jack. you have to work on your comprehension. As it was an overreaction to 9/11, it does. As it helped OBL's purpose, it does. Now stay within that context and try to answer.
Click to expand...
Like all leftists, you really should adopt new theories. Especially when the evidence is placed in front of view. As well, you are giving OBL far too much credit.

As the article posted by Jack Hays says"

Candidate Bush, as early as 1999, made it clear that Iraq would be dealt with. In a speech at the Citadel military academy on Sept. 23, 1999, he said achieving peace in the world will "require firmness with regimes like North Korea and Iraq, regimes that hate our values and resent our success. I will address all these priorities in the future."
Click to expand...

and
Beginning in the Clinton administration, official US policy called for "regime change" in Iraq, which had flouted United Nations resolutions put in place after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. But in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush administration cast its campaign against Hussein as part of the war on terror.
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
Plan doesn't mean he would have. He needed an excuse. But as I said, it doesn't change anything I said. Not one thing. 9/11 happened. He used it, and it was an overreaction, over done, overstepped. And it helped OBL, giving him a second bite at the apple.
Click to expand...

You are free to believe as you wish, facts notwithstanding.
 
The events of 11 September accomplished many goals, most of all them involving money. That's how false flag operations work in the ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom