It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Muaddib
Should we declare war against Russia for arming both Iraq and now Iran against the US?
Is it not also double standard when we know that some of the countries who profess they are our allies are also helping Islamic extremist countries who have professed their hatred towards the US and whose sole purpose for arming themselves is to defy and fight the US?
We know Putin is two-faced, quietly allowing proliferation to terrorist nations, yet domestically wiping out the Chechens when it fits his agenda. But there wasn't any Russians hijacking planes on 9/11.
Originally posted by Vajrayana
We know Putin is two-faced, quietly allowing proliferation to terrorist nations, yet domestically wiping out the Chechens when it fits his agenda. But there wasn't any Russians hijacking planes on 9/11.
Originally posted by Vajrayana
I wasn't for the Iraq invasion, but I am pleased that Saddam is incapacitated after all the effort & toll. If this is the indirect strategy of bottling the other evil genies than so be it.
Originally posted by Muaddib
Vajrayana, the US cannot be in a global war with every country at the same time. The US, like any other country, finds compromise with those countries that are willing to work with the US.
Or would you rather truly have a global conflict in which the US and allies attack every country that in one way or another have a double standard against the US and other western allies?
Originally posted by Vajrayana
I'm not for armageddon. Not being a Monday morning quarterback or armchair general , after 9/11 i hoped we would have conducted a full scale invasion of Afghanistan, that means not just eliminating Taleban & Al Qaida strongholds & centers of operation, but conducting thorough seek & destroy missions throughout the tribal regions for any retreating remnants, not tiptoeing around them concerned about offending tribal sensitivities if they were indeed harboring scum, when pursuit lead to the Pakistani border, we should of demanded Musharraf hand over Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad & A Q Khan or face invasion as well. I doubt they would've pissed off a determined dragon with their limited arsenal. With Khan's network frozen, we could have traced the extent of it's proliferation and took measures against the recipients. If Saddam tried to interfere in our Al-Qaida hunt, he was next.
[edit on 2-6-2005 by Vajrayana]
While foreign fighters make up only around five percent of the overall insurgency, they are causing disproportionate damage with suicide attacks, the officer said.
The bombers are part of a complex, loosely connected insurgency that also includes former members of Saddam's Baath Party, Sunni Arab nationalists and Iraqis tied to the fighting by tribal, family and personal connections.
Originally posted by subz
Muaddib, why do you insist on insulting people? Does it make you feel better about yourself? Any way I digress
Originally posted by subz
You mentioned that Iraq was invaded becaus Saddam broke UN sanction and was arming himself with banned weapons. Fine. Bush knew in 2002 that the North Koreans were building nuclear weapons, he knew this before he launched his invasion of Iraq. Why did he choose to topple Saddam instead of Kim Jong Il? Wasnt the obvious threat of nuclear weapons greater from North Korea than from Iraq?
Originally posted by subz
Also the Taliban in Afghanistan were said that they should be removed for allowing terrorists to train and recruit in their country and for their harsh islamic law and ill treatment of women. How is that any different to what Saudi Arabia are doing? Women cant even drive a car in Saudi Arabia. People have their hands chopped off for stealing and beheadings occur frequently.
Why no attack against Saudi Arabia again? Money?
Why didnt the American government ask the Taliban nicely to put pressure on the terrorists in their country like Bush does to Saudi Arabia. Why invade Afghanistan? Why? Because Bush didnt have any business interests with them and the Taliban dont pump billions of dollars into the U.S economy. Quite the contrary actually, Afghanistan's Taliban were sitting in the way of a gas pipeline that Unocal wanted to develop there.
Bush invades Afghanistan without allowing the Taliban to even attempt to remove the terrorists. Bush installs an ex-Unocal employee, Hamid Karzai, as President of Afghanistan and low and behold one of the first orders of business is this gas pipelines approval.
The Taliban against the world
The Taliban regime faced international scrutiny and condemnation for its policies. Only Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates recognized the Taliban as Afghanistan's legitimate government. After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S., Saudi Arabia and the UAE cut diplomatic ties with the Taliban.
The Taliban allowed terrorist organizations to run training camps in their territory and, from 1994 to at least 2001, provided refuge for Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organization. The relationship between the Taliban and bin Laden is close, even familial—bin Laden fought with the mujahideen, has financed the Taliban, and has reportedly married one of his daughters to Mullah Muhammad Omar. The United Nations Security Council passed two resolutions, UNSCR 1267 (1999) and 1333 (2000), demanding that the Taliban cease their support for terrorism and hand over bin Laden for trial.
Originally posted by subz
Muaddib if this war on terror was actually about saving American lives and stopping the spread of WMDs the first two countries that the United States would of invaded would of been Saudi Arabia #1 and then North Korea.
The money says different though.
The Taliban recognized the need for international ties but wavered between cooperation—they claimed to have drastically cut opium production in July 2000—and defiance—they pointedly ignored international pleas not to destroy the 2000-year-old Buddhist statues of Bamian. However, they made no effort to curb terrorist activity within Afghanistan, a policy that ultimately led to their undoing.
Terror suspect seized in Saudi Arabia
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia, May 11 (UPI) -- Saudi security forces seized a terror suspect who has been on the run since December in the northern province of Zalfi, reports said Wednesday.
Saudi Arabia announces terror arrests
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) — Saudi officials arrested an al-Qaeda figure suspected of masterminding the Riyadh bombings, a newspaper reported Wednesday, and the U.S. ambassador warned that militant cells are likely still plotting attacks in the kingdom.
Originally posted by Muaddib
Where did i insult her?....
Originally posted by Muaddib
Well if you are so certain of all of the above, and you somehow have more intelligence sources than the US intelligence agencies, then you should be running as head of the CIA , NSA, or any of the other three lettered agencies.
Originally posted by FredT
WAR: Over 40 Percent of Iraqi Suicide Bombers Are Saudi
A "martyrs" list on a Zarqawi web site found that only 10 percent of the bombers were born in Iraq
curme
Anything from the NY Post is suspect
FredT
The House of Saud is really ripe for a fall.
topsecretbomb
i dont see how some of the bombers could be french?
Originally posted by periwinkle blue
Bin Laden was a Saudi Arabian. The Wahabi sect of Islam permeates Saudi Society.
Why are we stunned at the predominating Saudi portion of these suicide bombers?
On the bright side.... that's some Saudi manpower that cannot now be re-used.