If Obama Wins - Page 5




 
--
 
August 4th, 2008  
MontyB
 
 
Here is a question for you:
If the west was to pull out of the middle east completely and then in a fit delussional grandeur even pack up Israel and drop it in the Arizona desert leaving the entire middle east to who ever the hell was left there do you really think bin Laden and the boys will go into retirement?

I know I don't, the reality is that the more you accommodate him the more he and his merry band will want and it will not stop at the middle east.

My personal belief is that there are and should be no scenarios that see the likes of Bin Laden dying of old age.
August 4th, 2008  
mmarsh
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Here is a question for you:
If the west was to pull out of the middle east completely and then in a fit delussional grandeur even pack up Israel and drop it in the Arizona desert leaving the entire middle east to who ever the hell was left there do you really think bin Laden and the boys will go into retirement?

I know I don't, the reality is that the more you accommodate him the more he and his merry band will want and it will not stop at the middle east.

My personal belief is that there are and should be no scenarios that see the likes of Bin Laden dying of old age.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Retirement no, kept to his own yard yes. Osama has no support outside of Muslim countries, he is only successful where he has a sympathetic ear to his anti-west rants. So why on earth would he want to come to the Lion's Den where he is universally despised and there is an enormous price on his head? It be like Bush trying to convert Pakistan to evanglist Christianity.

Secondly I never said Osama should be allowed to win or even be allowed to continue to breathing, all I said was just that WE (the USA) have no business in the Middle East, least of all with a oppressive regime like the kingdom of Saud, a family so corrupt and arrogent they named the whole country after themselves.
August 4th, 2008  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
Secondly I never said Osama should be allowed to win or even be allowed to continue to breathing, all I said was just that WE (the USA) have no business in the Middle East, least of all with a oppressive regime like the kingdom of Saud, a family so corrupt and arrogent they named the whole country after themselves.
I don't agree, the US can go anywhere that legitimate governments invite them to be and if the people of said countries have an issue with that then they should take it up with their own respective governments and not run around blowing things up.

I am not going to argue the merits of the Saudi's because they don't appear to have a great deal of them but whether the US should be dealing with the Saudi's is an issue for the American people its government not Bin Laden.
--
August 4th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
For many of these groups, having an enemy, whether it be the Saud Family, the USA or whatnot, is the only legitimate source of their power.
Just think, you have a concept like Satan except it has now become something you can see, hear, feel, even kill... and you have MILLIONS of young people who know their lives will amount to nothing but here's their chance to be a hero.
Mmarsh, you have to realize this. It applies to our own government as well as their own bodies of governance may it be legal or not: power is a means to itself, it is not a means to an end.
August 4th, 2008  
Fat Frank
 
 
If I can go back to my original post, the problem lies with Osama et al (let us include the Taliban as there is evidence that they did and continue to shield Osama) and not with the people of Iraq.

Nobody would ever (will almost no one) argue with the fact that Saddam was a despot. But there so a many others in the world. I don’t see the US and others invading them. The US public were lied too, deceived and continue to send their sons to die (well maybe not some Senators) in a war they should never have got involved in from day one. Anyone sensing a little déjà vu here?

The US WILL leave Iraq (today, tomorrow, the next day) and end up handing Iraq back to a government that is not favourably disposed to the West. The US dollar has depreciated 34% in the last period. Even Iran have been pushing this fact. The US can not afford the war in Iraq, simple.

There is also going to come a time when these Middle Eastern nations are going start insisting on paying for oil only in Euro because of their very negative view of the US. Let us see what that does for the dollar and the balance of payments which is out the window already.

This thread seems to have taken the direction of whether talking to terrorists is a good or bad thing. The real fact of the matter is that there will never be a solution to these matters without dialogue.

For all you “nay sayers”, read Cobra II, maybe it will open the blinkers a little.
August 6th, 2008  
Italian Guy
 
 
Fat Frank rarely do I stumble across people with whom I happen to disagree as systematically as I do with you.
August 6th, 2008  
Fat Frank
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Italian Guy
Fat Frank rarely do I stumble across people with whom I happen to disagree as systematically as I do with you.
No worries, time will tell
August 6th, 2008  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Frank
This thread seems to have taken the direction of whether talking to terrorists is a good or bad thing. The real fact of the matter is that there will never be a solution to these matters without dialogue.

For all you “nay sayers”, read Cobra II, maybe it will open the blinkers a little.
I agree that dialogue is in the end going to be the deciding factor however that dialogue can not happen until one side is sufficiently weakened enough to be brought to the negotiating table.

In the case of Al Qaeda and co I doubt this position will arise until Bin Laden is dead and Bush's presidency is a distant memory and even then it will be a slow disintegration process of negotiating with fringe groups until such time as Al Qaeda no long pose a threat.

I agree though that this is not a battle that can be won on a purely military basis.
August 6th, 2008  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
In the case of Al Qaeda and co I doubt this position will arise until Bin Laden is dead and Bush's presidency is a distant memory and even then it will be a slow disintegration process of negotiating with fringe groups until such time as Al Qaeda no long pose a threat.

I agree though that this is not a battle that can be won on a purely military basis.
Do you really think that the death of Bin Laden will alter the course of the Muslim radicals? I fear that it may just elevate him to the status of a martyr and groups like Al Qaeda will just use his martyrdom as a stepping stone to continue the fight against those who killed him.

To be honest, I feel that Bin Laden has lost his power to really take a proactive part in this debacle other than as a figurehead, in which case his death will have little or no positive effect for the coalition. In fact it would not surprise me if it was found that he was a bigger thorn in our side, dead than alive.
August 6th, 2008  
AikiRooster
 
 
Not to mention the fact that he may be dead already.
Al Qaeda is only one of their organizations and not most nasty, Hamas is more of threat and so are the ones we don't even know the names of yet that I am sure are also here and abroad waiting to do bad things to us.
 


Similar Topics
Obama goes to war
Barack Obama May Recruit Defence Chief Robert Gates
YES!!! OBAMA WINS THE NOMINATION!!!!
John McCain And Barack Obama Tilt Toward The Center On Iraq Plans
Many Troops Would Stay In Iraq If A Democrat Wins