CIA head has an idea where Bin Laden is

They both pose 4000 times the threat an Iraq does. I wouldn't have us blindly invade either country but they are the two countries we should have been and should be concerned with.

 

are you saying we are not concerned with them? i dont buy this idea that the war in iraq has distracted us from n korea and pakistan? distracted us from what, not attacking them?

 

my opinion is this: we start getting out of iraq now.
We did what we had to do.Take saddam out, seek out weapons...
we go saddam, but no weapons...

we need to make sure the country is
set up with some sort of leader that will benefit them, and get the hell out...

This country, I feel, has been "tricked" almost into going to war with iraq/terrorists... I also feel we got some bad "intelligence" from someone (obviously) about the WMD.

in all seriousness, there was no REAL reason for us to go.

America was still pissed off for 9/11 (and still is, well most of us) and since we already had troops there, it was like "oh hell, lets go get saddam too!"

i just felt like afghanistan was a ploy to get us to go attack iraq as well...

that plan just seems, and seemed at the time, a little fishy to me... "convienent" ???

besides our "intelligence" that turned out to be wrong anyways.

I feel we as a country and a military should be worried just a little more about north korea and the paki's... they are the ones with the bombs, and just crazy enough to use them...

bottom line: iraq poses no threat to the US anymore, neither does afghanistan. we need to talk to pakistan, demand them to let us find bin laden,

and if they don't...

start circling the wagons...

hell send ME first Commander and Chief, ill be happy to take out some of the bastards for you...

I say...

lets start preparing for the countries that do pose a threat to us, as we should have in the very beginning...

ok end of rant...

 

That is my biggest beef. It seemed too fishy for such a questionable invasion to be pressed so heavily when our country was still in complete emotional shock. It's kinda like the same way that I don't like to make decisions when I'm really pissed. I'd rather cool off, and think about it rationally. I don't see how we were any better off being so hasty about it. What, really, would have been mitigated had we actually taken the time to verify our 'intelligence'? The fact that we did not indicates a lot to me.

 

i guess the 12 years or whatever that iraq had been violating the terms of the 1991 cease fire were not enough for you.

 

Despite the fact that I have exploited the factual inaccuracies of this assertion several times, whatever UN violations jargon that you want to use to justify it still did not require us to act with such a sense of urgency.

 

yes, i know, i just said the 12 years were not enough. 12 years is way too "urgent". geez, slow it down!

 

Ok then, let's pretend you're right for a second. If we actually did just lollygag for 12 years, why was it all of a sudden so urgent?

 

good question, i guess they probably should have waited another 12 years. they hurried too much.