A story from WW2; bin Laden motive that Bush doesn't see

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't think that he realizes that OBL wants him to attack Iraq.

I think he does... but do we want to structure our entire foreign policy on what OBL will like and won't like?

[Bereta_Eder]

No but rather in what will benefit your people instead of just the oil companies.

[Pekka]

I also think Dubya realizes that OBL wants that to happen. He has advisors etc if he somehow missed it.

[Ming]

Sava... I did read what you wrote... very carefully. A sad story to say the least.

But it doesn't change the fact that your assumption that Bush doesn't know the dangers is just plain wrong. The fact that you are using this argument to support your anti war view is kind of silly.

[Sava]

Ming, I'm not using it to support my view at all. In fact, I don't have a concrete view at all. My opinion is not a static, peacenik view that we shouldn't go to war at all costs. I simply want the planning for such military action to be well thought out. Let's not kid ourselves, Iraq has been on the Bush agenda from the beginning, this isn't something he just thought about when 9-11 happened. He's had a clear idea of what he wants.

My point is that Bush's plan doesn't take enough consideration or place enough importance on the dangers or the costs of this war. There are certainly things that could be done to improve his plan. But his mind is so set in stone. It's easy to throw taxpayer's money around and play God with American lives. Look at Afghanistan for Pete's sake! There was no planning on what to do once the Taliban was gone. It's complete chaos there. Bush even said, "We aren't into nation building."

For any military operation in Iraq to succeed, that nation needs to be stabilized once Saddam is gone. My point isn't that Bush doesn't know the dangers... I can't even begin to count how many times I've said this. My point is that he isn't thinking enough about a post-Saddam Iraq. And that is going to have more of an affect on the risk of terrorism against the US than Saddam being in power.

Paiktis... this Iraq thing isn't totally about oil. Sure, the availability of the oil to American companies is a factor, but it's not the whole story.

[Ming]

Now you are changing your tune. Your original point was ONLY that Bush wasn't considering that he was playing into OBL's hands and that he was going to piss off the Arab world. And that is just silly.

Now you are backstepping with other arguments

*granted, at least they are more valid than your original statements in your first post*

[Velociryx]

Oh, enough with the "it's all about oil" drivel.

That's no more true than all the nonsense about how we don't "know" whether or not Saddam has Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Both are patently false and silly statements.

If it was all about oil, we'd likely not risk armed invasion, which would risk Saddam igniting the wells, now would we? Nahhh, much easier to use our financial clout to get what contracts we want, Frenchies not withstanding (sorry guys, but our economy is 3x bigger than yours....if we want to play hardball, you will lose)--same with the EU....can't compete effectively with the welfare state you've got. That's why, even WITH the 15 new member states waiting in the wings, the EU economy will be a three-toed sloth compared to the US's....but hey, don't take my word for it....watch the performance for the next few years and see for yourself.

It's not all about oil, and it's not about american imperialism, and it's not about some bizzare conspiracy involving little green space friends, elvis, hitler, and jfk.

It's about an a$$hole who has been in the sandbox too long, and it's time for him to go.

He was OUR a$$hole (bought and paid for) for a long time. We put him there. More recently, he became France and Germany's a$$hole, and now we're going to remove him.

And I can promise you this.

They'll run out of people to fly planes into buildings, blow up cafe's filled with civilians, gas Kurds, and other wholesome activities like that a looooong time before we run out of bullets.

-=Vel=-

[Jaguar]

Beautiful post, Vel.



Sava, I agree that bin Laden wants to piss us off. However, there's a difference between an attack specifically to remove the government, and an all out genocide.

[Kramerman]

Yes, how dare those evil americans? This is sooo parallel to the granfather's story. I mean, slaughtering every man between the ages of 12 and 70 is completely relevant to today's situation of toppling a desptoic dictator... The US will deserve any and all terrorist attacks they receive for doing this evil deed...

Of course i understand that OBL will contort and manipulate what happens in Iraq for propaganda, to enrage and inflame the ME, and it is obvious this is OBL's goal, to get the US to attack Iraq. But i just dont see any real parallel betwen OBL's idea and that of the Serbian partisans.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ming
Now you are changing your tune. Your original point was ONLY that Bush wasn't considering that he was playing into OBL's hands and that he was going to piss off the Arab world. And that is just silly.

Now you are backstepping with other arguments

*granted, at least they are more valid than your original statements in your first post*

If anything, I didn't properly spell out my point in the first.

[Sava]

I should point out that I'm not specifically characterizing a war with Iraq as something the Nazis would do. Overall, the idea is just, it's the method I object to.

[Ming]

No kidding

[SlowwHand]

What can he say ? Sava knows he's objectionable.

[Sava]

REMEMBER SLOWW I"M WATCHING YOU!

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Heh... when you get a nuke blown up in Chichago in 15 years, after all this has settled and this was a group of Iraqis who became fatherless in the coming war you will think WTF Arabs hate us!!!

This time you are not fighting an evil regime that its own people knew was evil, now you are fighting the people themselves (hey don't ask me how many people will die from US trying to save the Iraqis from their evil dicator that was put into place by US 30 years ago,) if we have forgotten it, the starving Iraqis surely did not. (nor do the Saudis that US helps keep their evil-dicators in place) In these days of fast intercontinental travel this can be a dangerous business. Even more than the cold-war, and the gung-ho Bush style surely doesn't help. Taking care of OBL and his network would have been a good first step, but noooo Iraq is THE threat its WOMD are a threat to you dear people in the west. WTF?!? Even bigger threat than Kim Jong with his nuclear capacity? (or Pakistan for that matter - now Pakistan the country that propped Taliban in the first place and shielded Al Quaeda is soooo resopnsible)... Are we going after tehm next? Or do they just have the dicator that his people love so we are not going to overthrow him

Or is it the fact that Saddam is an easy target (or was meant to be) to show off who is the new boss in the playground win the elections and secure some energy money???

And to all those oil bashers? Why does US get implicated everywhere in the world where there is oil? Like ME/ Venezuela ? And not in some other fancy places like Sudan/Rwanda/ or Malaysian peninsula? Why is US out of Vietnam these days... Hey they are not too US friendly if I can remember still. But noone seems to be bothered. Who is crazy to spend money on them while billions go to corrupt dictators that are willing to listen like Saudis...

How come that the Mubarak/Saudi Royal family/ king of Jordan (well he seems like a genuinley good guy from a distance) are all US puppies and need US money or army to stay there in power while non-US loving leaders are the axis of evil ---- Iran/Lybia/Syria? All in ME - what is it for the silicon in the sand of for their beautiful archeological sites?

To say it is not about oil - what is it in that desert of sand that US needs to be present there as opposed to the desert in Sudan with an evil dicator?


Anyway... to think this is the only reason - of course not - there are many reasons pro and against, however taking some of them bluntly out is just naive.

Still Sava has a valid point and I think too that OBL's idea was that, and he is succeding (If I am correct he has stated this even before 9-11, to try and unite the muslim world againt the west). His unwilling partner on the other side is G.W.Bush, well he surely thinks he is not playing on OBL cards (at leat I hope so ) but I am sure OBL couldn't have imagined better. All the US arrogance and power coming to conquer (and unite) the muslim world against the west under the lead of US. OBL wet dream or what?

It is just happening. Who is right the future (or history) will tell us.