Tom Ridge to Address the Nation

[Dis]

Originally posted by Agathon


No, he wanted the US to invade Afghanistan in just the way the Soviets did.

What he didn't bargain for is that the US played it really smart and hired the Northern Alliance to do most of the fighting. This meant less US casualties (which would have been fatal to a US war effort if the war had gone on long enough).

He doesn't have a lot of resources in Iraq, but he doesn't really need them and he doesn't need to do a hell of a lot. A guerilla campaign is really cheap to run, read Che Guevara's book on how to conduct one.

If the occupation continues and the Shias get shut out of the political process things will get more violent. And the more US soldiers die for what appears to be an ungrateful bunch of Arabs, the harder it will be politically for Bush to keep them there.

But that's not the big Kahuna. OBL really wants one thing. To install an Islamist regime in Saudi Arabia - if that happens he wins. The obstacle to this is the Saudi Royal Family. Demographics are on his side, there are many disaffected youth in SA (as 911 showed) and all they really need is to wake up to the possibility of overthrowing the government. A moderately successful guerilla campaign in Iraq is a "threat of a good example".

That's what he wants, whether he will get it is another thing. It is not out of the question though and that is the reason I opposed the invasion of Iraq. Mass unrest in the Persian Gulf would be an economic disaster.

Only one person has anything to gain from risking chaos in the area and that's OBL.

Yes a U.S. ground campaign in Afghanistan would have been different. But of course the main difference between us and the Soviets is tremendous and accurate air power and bombardment. A luxery the Soviets did not have. But OBL may not realize this.

And yes I agree his ultimate goal may be to overthrow the Saudi royal family. The war in Iraq may actually aid in that. Without Saddam to threaten the region, there is no solidarity within Suadi Arabia against a potential threat. But we'll see how that plays out. But the Saudi royal family will not last forever. The question is who will take control.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Dissident


Yes a U.S. ground campaign in Afghanistan would have been different. But of course the main difference between us and the Soviets is tremendous and accurate air power and bombardment. A luxery the Soviets did not have. But OBL may not realize this.

Um, that is no use against guerillas. OBL and Co. are still around. What really screwed him is that the warlords thought they could get a better deal off the Americans.

[Imran Siddiqui]

call me a party pooper but isn't the whole "Terror Threat Level" a bit silly. Isn't it "terrorizing" people more than the terrorists?

I think it's silly too, but look at Berz's thread about the person suing the government for not releasing information about suspected plans to use planes as missiles before 9/11. Anything, as silly as it may sound now has to released so people don't ***** about it later.

[Dis]

so basically its whole purpose is to prevent or try to prevent lawsuits. interesting.

[vee4473]

I guess you just can't win.

If you keep the intel locked in a pentagon office, don't let the public know and something happens, then the administration is a bunch of bastards who should have done something...

If you warn the public about intel indicating a possible attack, then the administration is being "silly"..

[Imran Siddiqui]

so basically its whole purpose is to prevent or try to prevent lawsuits. interesting.

No, rather to prevent critizism if something happens.

[Sava]

Operation: Scare the Public... is underway

One of the reporters at the press conference asked a great question.

"What does this warning say about the progress on the war on terror? if this is an unprecedented level of chatter since 9-11, and larger attacks are expected, how much progress are we making?"

Tom Ridge stuttered and responded... "Well, we've got about two thirds or a half of their top leadership and frozen a lot of their assets!"



If there is another attack... Bush, Ridge, Condi Rice, and company are all to blame. I can't believe how America has given Bush a free ride after 9-11. If Clinton were president, the Repukes would have tried to impeach him again. But yet, with Bush, everyone falls in line. I still maintain that the administration is incompetent, ignorant, and inept in dealnig with terrorism. Bush has presided over the largest terror attack in the history of America... but where is the accountability? How many people from the TSA or FAA got fired over the security problems the lead to 9-11? NONE! How many people in the CIA or FBI or other intelligence agencies lost their jobs over the MASSIVE intelligence failure? NONE.

I really hope this is just another public scare tactic on the administration's part. I don't want more Americans to die because this administration doesn't know **** from Shinola when it comes to National Security.

[vee4473]

Originally posted by Sava
Operation: Scare the Public... is underway

One of the reporters at the press conference asked a great question.

"What does this warning say about the progress on the war on terror? if this is an unprecedented level of chatter since 9-11, and larger attacks are expected, how much progress are we making?"

Tom Ridge stuttered and responded... "Well, we've got about two thirds or a half of their top leadership and frozen a lot of their assets!"



If there is another attack... Bush, Ridge, Condi Rice, and company are all to blame. I can't believe how America has given Bush a free ride after 9-11. If Clinton were president, the Repukes would have tried to impeach him again. But yet, with Bush, everyone falls in line. I still maintain that the administration is incompetent, ignorant, and inept in dealnig with terrorism. Bush has presided over the largest terror attack in the history of America... but where is the accountability? How many people from the TSA or FAA got fired over the security problems the lead to 9-11? NONE! How many people in the CIA or FBI or other intelligence agencies lost their jobs over the MASSIVE intelligence failure? NONE.

I really hope this is just another public scare tactic on the administration's part. I don't want more Americans to die because this administration doesn't know **** from Shinola when it comes to National Security.

I'm curious if this same post would have been made if during Bill clinton's administration, the 1993 failed trade center bombing had actually been successful in taking down the towers back then..
hmmm...


The president is at least trying to do something about terrorism, and to say that there has been no progress is just dumbfounding...

Disrupting the Afghanistan training/planning camps did something, if temporary, until the murderers that survived find a new hole to set up shop.

How about just supporting the country in this war instead of using every opportunity to try to seize a political advantage?

[Sava]

Originally posted by vee4473
I'm curious if this same post would have been made if during Bill clinton's administration, the 1993 failed trade center bombing had actually been successful in taking down the towers back then..
hmmm...

absolutely...

The president is at least trying to do something about terrorism, and to say that there has been no progress is just dumbfounding...

I didn't say there was no progress. Nobody knows for sure. But the Tom Ridge's own statements support the notion that even the Bush admin (or at the very least Ridge) doesn't think there has been much progress.

Disrupting the Afghanistan training/planning camps did something, if temporary, until the murderers that survived find a new hole to set up shop.

You really think a man in a cave hooked up to dialysis (OBL) had direct control over the 9-11 operation? It sounds like you've bought their bull**** hook line and sinker. Whatever terrorist operations are in the works, the cells are already in the US and active. And leading the fools errand in Iraq certainly isn't doing much of anything. I think America would be better off spending hundreds of billions of dollars improving domestic security in the US than getting rid of spider hole Saddam. And those 150k troops would be of much better use inspecting cargo at our ports, or patroling our borders.

How about just supporting the country in this war instead of using every opportunity to try to seize a political advantage?

what political advantage? I'm not in politics... I see things going on that I believe to be wrong. I'm not going to support actions that I believe are detrimental to our security and the lives of our people. Patriotism isn't blindly supporting some dumbass president and his private vendetta war. Patriotism is supporting what you believe is best for your country, and holding FAILURES accountable.

[Ted Striker]

Well, there is no real hole left for them to hide in.

Nobody is going to offer them a place to stay.

Unless they want a couple of Predator drones swooping in on their punk asses.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Dissident
I'm really getting pissed at them raising the threat level and nothing happens. Yes I know that sounds ****ed up. I don't actually want something to happen. But if nothing is going to happen, then they shouldn't raise the threat level.

We need better intelligence.

We need female secret agents who sleep with the enemy to learn secrets. Throw a burkha on them if that is necessary.

how do you know that something didnt happen BECAUSE they raised the threat level?
[/obvious]

[Dis]

Originally posted by Uber KruX


how do you know that something didnt happen BECAUSE they raised the threat level?
[/obvious]

well then they would just attack after the theat level goes back down.

[Agathon]

You can't blame Clinton. It's a fact that he was pretty sharp on the need to do something about terror. The truth is that Bush and co. just ignored the whole thing when they came into office.

And the Repugnicans say that Dems are soft on security.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You can't blame Clinton. It's a fact that he was pretty sharp on the need to do something about terror.

Idle talk. Anyone can write a memo, Clinton didn't initiate any action to deal with the problem, however.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You can't blame Clinton. It's a fact that he was pretty sharp on the need to do something about terror.

Idle talk. Anyone can write a memo, Clinton didn't initiate any action to deal with the problem, however.

IIRC he did. Not military action, but homeland security stuff. I think I read about this in the NYROB.