Can America finish terrorism alone ?

[aneeshm]

I think he restored power wherever any substations were left after the bombing . Pls. correct me if I'm wrong here .

[DanS]

What's your backup for that assertion?

[Ming]

aneeshm... check your PM's.

Next time a mod deletes one of your threads, I would suggest you don't repost it. BYE!

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Saddam hadn't restored power fully 12 years after the end of Gulf War I.

Agreed. He diverted power from the other cities in order that Baghdad would have power 24/7. The Coalition spread power evenly so that everyone had the same amount thus every city but Baghbad had more while only Baghdad had less. BTW by repairing power plants which have been down for 12 years the US now has more power in EVERY part of Iraq then Saddam had before the war. That's right in 4 months they've done more then Saddam could do in 12 years.

[Xeones]

paitkis kind of summed up how i see this "war on terrorism":

"bottom line they dont care about international terrorism, they dont follow any principles of human rights and democracy, they just want to keep their own people safe and keep pushing their interests, whatever the cost to the others, unless it becomes too high for them as well."

although i am cynical enough to go farther than that... i doubt that the people in charge of america really care about keeping americans safe (and most *certainly* do not care 2 cents about anyone outside america's borders.) from all i have read, they let 9/11 happen. they are 'allied' with governments who were involved (saudi arabia). they do all they can to prevent investigations into 9/11, public info, freedoms, and so on. they care only for remaining in control and gaining more of it. right now the war suits that, so voila! they don't intend to win the war on terror. indeed they are an active participant in worldwide terrorism.