It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by xpert11
Unless it can be proven other wise the only prudent course of action is to assume that Bin Laden is still alive and any plan of action should revolve this conclusion.
Originally posted by Black_Fox
Why does it have to be assumed he is alive at all?
There probalty more reason to believe he is dead.
Originally posted by deltaboy
I say bomb the hell out of it.
Many people in that region are sympathizers
Then one day Musharaff changes his mind and says - "OK boys" and we finish off this threat in one big and ugly offensive
Alright, they're rebuilding Al Qaeda and the U.S. knows where they are being trained. Why are we hearing this? If you know where the enemy is does it not make sense to attack and eliminate them before they can inflict any damage on you?
We should be reading about how Al-Qaeda bases have been attacked and destroyed by NATO forces
The only people that would hate you for destroying the training camp are the terrorists inside i
'That is important to note, because American troops under no circumstances may cross into Pakistan unless specific orders are given by Pakistan.
but they have nuclear capabilities and that in the wrong hands could be very bad..
And don't relate that to "controlling" our own border, if we placed troops in the south to shoot any one who looks like they might think about crossing I can assure you it would be stopped, and that is exactly what they do in Afghanistan / Pakistan /quote]
And it doesn't work. It doesn't work even remotely well.
Boy.. I can't wait till Liberals are back in power...
Sure will be interesting....
You do realize that the policy of not going after bin ladin, of staying out of pakistan, and of not changing tactics in iraq to make it more successful, were all the result of rightists, not leftists, no?
I mean, what CAN the 'liberals' do that is worse? Not get invovled in the war in the first place? Even that can't be said to be worse at this point. Because before, we had hussein. Now, we have a Super Iran, with carte blanche against future invasion, and iraqi oil revenues going directly into international terrorism, with al-qaida being a major player in that too.
I mean, honestly, how much worse than the worst US foreign policy disaster in history can the 'evil liberals' get eh? Bush has failed to stop Iranian nukes, done nothing other than cave in on NK nukes, given up on hunting bin ladin, failed to win in iraq, and al lthe while chavez has been building up a socialist bloc in our own backyard. Its gotten to where we can barely even pretend to rattle our sabres when Putin, a guy who guns down reporters and uses radioactive poison to kill a spy IN LONDON, is critizising us.
And now, even with all that going on, we find out that Bin Ladin is getting even stronger in a safe-haven that it would be 'impolitic' to go into? Wasn't the whole idea of the "Bush Doctrine" that we wouldn't let exactly that situation happen?
All of pakistan will hate us, for invading their country, bombing their citizens, and flattening their towns. Just like the iraqis hated us for invading their country.