Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 59

• 0%

  STONERS1 year, 1 month ago

  "Qari Yousef Ahmadi, who claims to speak for the Taliban, said the militants were giving the Afghan and South Korean governments until 10:30 a.m. EDT Monday to respond to their demand that 23 Taliban prisoners be freed in exchange for the Koreans."

  "A police chief in Ghazni province said Afghan officials and elders had met with the kidnappers on Sunday to resolve the crisis. U.S. and Afghan troops also moved into the region in case military leaders call for a rescue operation."

  "This is a breaking news update. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below."

  Reply

  17 Replies

  • 0%

    STONERS1 year, 1 month ago

    LMAO!!!! I'm being stocked again;];];] it must be nice to have all the time she does to sit on here and watch everybodies moves...How borring your life must be...Well if it gives you something to do...LOL-LOL!!!!!

    Reply
  • 0%

    bobo-in-texas1 year, 1 month ago

    The most devout followers of The Religion of Peace demonstrate the love that is Islam.

    Reply

    15 Replies

    • 0%

      blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

      Sadly so, BBinTexas, sadly so.

      But let us not forget that the Taliban evince a particularly distorted version of Islam -- the foulness of which was amply demonstrated during their "reign of error" in Afghanistan up until 2001.

      Their attempts to drive this benighted land back to the 14th century (while providing safe havens for crazed Jihadists) really must not be allowed to succeed.

      Reply
    • 0%

      Daylight1 year, 1 month ago

      BoBo in Texas

      You are habitually attacking the religion Islam, shows your ignorance, these people are human beings they are fighting a evil country on the face of the earth and they may be compelled to do things which Islam does not approve, yet they do things that are forbidden in Islam. How can you expect a merciful God to approve killing of innocent people, but here the Koreans are working for the puppet regime and they are considered to be the guests of the government and Taliban was actually toppled by the West to impose their brand of government, here you are the criminals, you kill a lot of innocent civilians in Afghanistan every day. But one thing is evidently clear to the Muslim world that when the Afghans fought the evil empire the Communist regime, they were called Mujahideen and when they are fighting the same evil West which has the Zionist agenda in every Islamic country, now calls them terrorist, extremist, Islamofacist and any name you can invent, this is very sad.

      Reply

      13 Replies

      • 0%

        bobo-in-texas1 year, 1 month ago

        Daylight confirms that real Muslims such as himself support the killing of hostages, in this case mostly women.

        The Prophet must be so proud.

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • 0%

          Thinker221 year, 1 month ago

          Daylight proves how wrong 'Blinkers' is saying that "Taliban evince a particularly distorted version of Islam".

          Unfortunately, Taliban represents the views of the Muslim majority as Daylight and others are proving here on a daily basis.

          Reply

          1 Reply

          • 0%

            Daylight1 year, 1 month ago

            Thinker22

            OK great Thinker what would you do if Russia or China topples your evil regime and install their puppet in your country? Would you allow the puppet to rule your country? You talk of innocent people when it comes to your own kind or your friends, you have been killing hundreds of Muslims in Muslim countries everyday and you help Israel to kill them with money, weapons and unqualified support as well. Are you telling me you don't see your own news or read anything about your atrocities on civilians and innocent in those Muslim countries? As long as you occupy and bomb them, they retain the right to kill you, they don't care the millions of Muslims around the world even if they disapprove or not, what they do in their country is their business. The best thing now is that you are there and fight them or get out; you have no option, kill those who fight with you or you be killed.

            Reply
        • 0%

          Daylight1 year, 1 month ago

          BoBo in Texas

          Daylight confirms that real Muslims such as himself support the killing of hostages, in this case mostly women.

          The Prophet must be so proud.

          America and her allies have destabilized Muslim lands with their fifth column mercenaries and puppet agents, this is indeed real terrorism. The west's perpetual plotting and conspiracies to maintain power are engraved in the annals of history. In their terror the started the first world war and then dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima in the Second World War. They are the cause and leaders of human destruction everywhere and dare to pose before the world as the upholders of "civilized norms of behavior."

          Bo Bo, and the ilk need to read their own history before accusing Islam and the prophet of Islam. You have started the war and now blame Muslims who fight fire with fire. Blaming Islam or Muslims is not going to help you out of the bottomless pit in which you have thrown yourself. We know what Islam is.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            2bao1 year, 1 month ago

            I'm not going to express an opinion on Islam and the Muslim peoples. However, I cannot let alone your distorted understanding of the two World Wars.

            There was no huge conspiracy terror plot (or w/e you think it is) that aimed at starting the 1st World War. Most of the war consisted of Western vs Western fighting, so I don't really see the relevance of applying it to this topic. The war also resulted in a huge collapse of the Western power structure leading to the independence of many Eastern European countries and the collapse of the German, Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian, and Russian empire as well as set up financially the breakup of the British empire. Thus, your claim that these wars were the result of the plotting for power makes no sense. As for the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima in the Second World War - America did not militarily enter the war until the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Again, your accusation is misguided, misinformed, or a combination of the two.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

              And World War I had nothing to do with the Ottoman Empire's attempts to expand their control into the British colonies, into the Balkans, and a jihad across the Caucaus Mountains into Russia, right? Those didn't happen did they?

              It's just completely made-up...the Muslim world didn't declare a Jihad against the Russians or Egypt did they? Nah...that didn't happen, nope.

              (end sarcasm)

              Reply
      • 0%

        KMFDM1 year, 1 month ago

        Daylight, it is easy for Bobo to criticize islam when he is not in his white sheets and hood.

        wink wink, nudge nudge,say no more...

        KMFDM doint it again.

        Reply

        3 Replies

        • 0%

          schillinfl11 year, 1 month ago

          You must be confused. It's easy to criticize Islam simply by looking at all the conflicts around the world and you'll see Islamic Extremists are envolved in all of them!

          When you have 1.2 Billion Muslims and 10% of them are either extremists or sympathetic towards extremists (120 Million extremists), it looks to me a little criticism is warranted.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            schillinfl11 year, 1 month ago

            Ahhh... another apologist.

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

              Schillinfl1,

              How dare you call him an apologist!!! Quit being a stupid lil' ziocon and get it right...

              Geodesic and Daylight are not apologists...they are part of they are card carrying members of Hezzbollah! How dare you call them apologist!

              And lastly, Islam is a religion of tolerance and peace. If you disagree then they will behead you and put it on the internet!

              Reply
      • 0%

        saintetienne1 year, 1 month ago

        Oh please, Daylight....

        Let's be clear. "Mujahideen", "Afghans", "Islamics".... call it what you will, but Afghanistan - no matter who they're fighting (and they're ALWAYS fighting someone) - is and always will be the backwards, impoverished dump of the Earth.

        Why?

        Because the Afghan "leaders" are too proud (read: arrogant), insular (read: uncooperative) and zealously religious (read: brainwashed) to ever be able to lead their people out of oppression, poverty and a miserable life among the collapsing ruins of a once-great (about a thousand years ago) culture. In fact, the "leaders" have the people right where they want them - poor, uneducated and powerless. Manufacturing heroin and giving shelter to the Taliban are the final nails in the coffin of a nasty, hostile country which NO one - the "evil" West, the far East, or all points in between, wants to deal with.

        Reply

        2 Replies

        • 0%

          saintetienne1 year, 1 month ago

          What does that have to do with Afghanistan being a hostile, backwards stinkhole, with no hope of ever becoming a functioning, industrious nation in today's world?

          Reply
        • 0%

          djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

          Yes...the US set up the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. We supplied the Russians arms and munitions so we could then supply the Afghans arms and munitions.

          Seriously...at least get your incorrect history coherent...

          Reply
• 0%

  getreal11 year, 1 month ago

  I guess Bush will hit congress for another blank check since south Korea will pull out. Which means more of our kids will be overseas.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    comfortstrike1 year, 1 month ago

    congress pays the bill or the legal united states citizens?

    Reply
• 0%

  blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

  The Taliban's long-term strategy is generally to convince the long-suffering Afghan people that as long as ANY foreigners remain in the country, there will be violence, unrest, and killing.

  Unless these medieval minded, Jihad-supporting militiamen are fought with renewed intelligence and cunning (on the part of the foreign-backed Afghan army and their supporters) this cynical strategy will ultimately prevail.

  Reply
• 0%

  evelyna1 year, 1 month ago

  Did Kim allow them to come into his country and take his people?

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

    The Koreans were in Afghanistan with the full knowledege and approval of the Karzai government in Kabul -- a government fully recognized by the world at large, through the UN.

    By attacking/kidnapping foreigners (even the Chinese are not safe), the Taliban is signalling its intention to drive a wedge between the Afghan population and the foreigners there to help them. It will be a long war.

    Reply
• 0%

  Karick1 year, 1 month ago

  Those bad Americans . . .or are they? When is the last time you read that unless the enemy does as we demand we will kill prisoners and hostages and transmit the lethal acts to the world? And we should pull out of Iraq??

  Reply

  14 Replies

  • 0%

    ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

    For the 1 millionth time, Afghanistan isn't Iraq. Pull out a map and check. You will see this it the truth.

    The terrorist that attacked us on 911 were based in Afghanistan, controlled by Osama bin Laden, and protected by the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan.

    Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq, not Afghanistan. I know this is a lot to take in. It may require many readings. But Saddam had sent out death squads to KILL bin Laden. Saddam was not bin Laden and Afghanistan was not Iraq. Forget how often the Bush administration tries to link them. That's just lies to cover their own incompetence. Their insistence on links that simply don't exist is what got us into the royal mess we are in now in the Middle East.

    Reply

    12 Replies

    • 0%

      jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago

      Al Qaeda

      Taliban

      Hezbollah

      Baathist

      Wahabist madrassas

      Iranian Theocracy

      Abu Sayyaf

      And Many More

      Call them what you will, no matter where they may be currently residing, they are fighting to unify the Islamic people under a restored caliphate, and to establish the hegemony of Islamic law over the reunified umma, as well as over the non-Muslim world. In doing this, they say, they are acting in complete accord with the commandments of their religion, which mandates warfare against non-Muslims in order to establish Islamic rule. And they have declared that in this struggle, the United States is their principal foe.

      Reply

      11 Replies

      • 0%

        ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

        jimdoze, You make the same mistake as the Bush Administration. Knowing little or nothing of the culture of dozens of countries and the religious/political movements within them, it is far easier to just "doze" through the history and world politics classes and lump them all together as one and the same.

        From your list, Al Qaeda, some Wahabists (those involved in Al Qaeda, for instance) are working for a Pan-Arabic Islamic Caliphate. All the others you mention are focused on bringing political change in their own territory and are as opposed to the intervention of Al Qaeda as they are the intervention of the United States and Great Britain.

        Granted they may choose to ally briefly with "the enemy of my enemy", much the same as the Vietnamese threw their lot in briefly with China to get America out of their civil war. The Vietnamese had 2000 years of experience with how to kick out the Chinese. They weren't sure that alone they could handle the USA.

        Reply

        5 Replies

        • 0%

          ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

          geodesic is absolutely right. To the degree that your disparate list has thrown in together, it is due to the West, and mostly the USA and Great Britain spending 60 years interfering with and attempting to control Arab governments to ensure a flow of cheap oil and keep control of oil production in the hands of Western oil companies.

          To that end, the British threw the Sunnis, Kurds and Shiia together into an artificially created nation called Iraq. When the government of this new country wasn't hading as we wished, our CIA helped catapult Saddam into dictatorship. http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/217.html

          Likewise, we are hated in Iran because we helped overthrow an elected and popular Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh and replace him with the hated and brutal dictator, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. All to keep Mossadegh from nationalizina Iranian Oil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

          Reply

          4 Replies

          • 0%

            jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago

            Those are cats that are long out of the bag, ET. Because those things happened neither condemns nor excuses what is done today. They are great object lessons, however.

            Keep in mind that we also catapulted Saddam out of dictatorship. One could look at that as a mea culpa, but seeing the U.S. constantly as the villian would prevent that.

            I took a lot of heart from the elections that were held in Iraq. But, clearly those elections scared the bejesus out of major players both inside and outside that country. I consider the blowback that we have today more a result of the elections than of anything else.

            Reply

            3 Replies

            • 0%

              ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

              Yeah, I understand the idea of you have to play the ball where it lies. It was a huge blunder to go into this adventure, but we could easily compound the error if we pull out of it with even less thought and panning than we gave to going in.

              The elections in Iraq prove nothing. Given the ethinc and religious percentages, they were absolutely predictable without even being run. The Shiia, 60% of the population, will ALWAYS dominate parliament with 60% of the seats. Sunni and Kurdish seats will always be 20% each, meaning they don't even have a voice if they unite.

              As I see it, there are two possible exit strategies, and we need to adopt one of them sooner rather than later.

              Follow Joe Biden's proposal to partition the country into 3 federal districts with strong state's rights and a weak federal government equally represented by each. Downsides.

              Reply
            • 0%

              ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

              1 - This requires the forced relocation of millions of people, many who have been living in their homes for multiple generations.

              2 - Only two of these three districts produce any oil. Why would the Shiia and Kurds VOTE to share their oil revenues with the Sunnis, who have no oil in their region?

              3 - How do we assure our ally, Turkey, that an independent Kurdish state on their border will not become a breeding ground for terrorist strikes into their territory when that's already happening with the present situation?

              Second Option. Set a withdrawal date, then begin high level talks with Iran, Syria, Turkey, Jordan and any other interested neighbors. Warn them that we are leaving, and that if they continue their current approach to Iraq, they will be responsible for producing a failed state on their border. Enlist their support of an Arab/Iranian UN peacekeeping force to stand up a stable Iraq after our exit.

              Reply
            • 0%

              ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

              Downsides to this plan?

              1 - It might not work.

              2 - It leaves hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who believed the Bush Administration poop about glorious democracy breaking out at VERY serious risk of torture or murder. We have to arrange for safety for those who helped us, even if that means that no other country will take them, and we must accept them here. Yeah, I know immigration isn't popular now. It really SHOULD be the responsibility of our European friends who told us this was a fools errand back in 2002. But if they turn out to be as intractable as usual, we cannot repeat the ultimate error of Vietnam and abandon all those who put their lives on the line to help us.

              Reply
      • 0%

        Daylight1 year, 1 month ago

        jimdoze

        With the traditional secular arrogance the West plans the destinies of more than1.5 billion Muslims, but in the end only to see it blueprint goes up in flames, Iraq, Iran, Palestine, Afghanistan and Beirut are examples proving that the West's arrogance is matched only by its ignorance. The west is grossly ignorant when it comes to understanding Islam, the west token peace overtures to the Muslim people via hand picked despotic rulers are not good enough when those rulers are not popularly accepted leaders of Islam.

        Finding out what Islam is about means studying unbiased reading materials authored by Islamic scholars, and not the bigoted, half-truth churned by semi-informed western oriantlists. Jews and Christians with distorted notions about Islam insult Islam every turn and then try to justify this by pointing to the bad actions of some Misguided Muslims, but misguided Muslims are not the product of Islam and the Quran, Continues

        Reply

        4 Replies

        • 0%

          Daylight1 year, 1 month ago

          neither are the spiritually bankrupt leaders and rulers of Muslim countries who gamble, drink alcohol, fornicate and waste Muslim resources, similarly Islam reject hereditary monarchies and pro-nationalist rulers and dictators. This is something people like you should know about Islam before you keep posting the same trash over and over again, and what you posted reflects your deep-seated ignorance about Islam and nothing else.

          Reply

          2 Replies

          • 0%

            ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago

            We may insult Islam at every turn. I don't argue that. Point taken.

            But we certainly don't issue Fatwas calling for the murder of certain Islamic leaders simply because they have insulted this or that profit of our own.

            We don't turn out in mass to burn Mohamed or the leader of some irascible Islamic nation in effigy in our streets.

            Fair is fair, but your comparisons ring far short or fair. There are changes needed on BOTH sides if we are to ever get along.

            If in the mind of the Islamists, such changes are impossible, then you have only to do the math to see what will happen. Islam = 1 billion plus with something like 30-50 nuclear warheads versus the rest of the world, with 5.7 billion people and something like 12,000 active nuclear warheads and more than that in reserve.

            If we are all so stupid as to have that battle, who do you think will win?

            Answer. NOBODY!

            Reply

            1 Reply

            • 0%

              jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago

              You've done the math and the answer is clear. NOBODY! I agree absolutely. However, this argument assumes that mutually assured destruction (NOBODY winning) is a sufficient deterent as it was during the cold war. Given the nature of at least some elements of Islamic culture and its clear ability to motivate individuals to sacrifice themselve to a certain death, it is doubtful that one can rest easy on the concept of deterrence. To the western mind, the battle would be stupid. Are you fully and absolutely convinced that it would be to the jihadist mind.

              By the way, Daylight, one does not need intimate knowledge of Islam to observe this.

              Reply
        • 0%

          jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago

          What part of Islam and what part of current Islamic culture encourages, promotes or demands that their leaders be "popularly accepted." No matter how you slice it, there is only one way to achieve leadership by popular acceptance... that is by blind ballot. You may slam that simple axiom as an ethnocentric western perception. However, there truly is no other way.

          Reply
  • 0%

    pcknowledge1 year, 1 month ago

    Bush shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the 1st place. Saddam did not have any WMD's. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

    Reply
• 0%

  Netscapots1 year, 1 month ago

  When will there ever be peace in the middle east? :(

  Reply

  2 Replies

  • 0%

    djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

    There will be peace in the middle east when Muslims learn to love their own children more than they hate Jews and Christians.

    They would much rather see their children die as suicide bombers than to see them live and contribute to society. When Muslims learn the measure of a man is not how he died but how he lived...then it will stop.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

      And when Radical Islam quits torturing, killing, raping, looting, kidnapping, and beheading anyone who isn't of the exact same faith then two-thirds of all of the refugees in the world can go home.

      Ending the Islamists crimes against humanity and Syrian, Iranian, and Saudi support for these crimes will be a big step towards peace.

      Also, if Muslims like you would quit being apologists for the torture, murder, rape, robbery of, kidnapping of, and beheading of anyone isn't Islamic that would also be a big step towards peace.

      Reply
• 0%

  shehnshah1 year, 1 month ago

  jsut give them some more opium and they'll all settle down.

  Reply

  1 Reply

  • 0%

    djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

    Are the only words you know "bushie" and "zioncon"? Seriously, go put on your hobo suit Mahmoud.

    Reply
• 0%

  aerosalt1 year, 1 month ago

  "Ahmadi said Saturday that militants shot and killed the Germans because Berlin hadn't pledged to pull its 3,000 troops out of Afghanistan."

  Diplomacy with these kind of people? Unlikely.

  Reply

• ranchhandComment removed: User banned.2 Replies

  • 0%

    Thinker221 year, 1 month ago

    > I say if they kill one of ours that includes our friends then we kill two of theirs

    Wrong, wrong and wrong! This kind of response will only breed more terrorists.

    The proper response should be "If they kill one of ours that includes our friends then we kill TWENTY of theirs the first time, TWO HUNDRED the second time and TWO THOUSAND the third time".

    No war in history was won by using "proportional" responses, only by overwhelming force.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

      Your "thinking" leads me to remember a place called "Lidice". Look it up.

      Reply
• 0%

  djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

  I'll still never forgive those ignorant bastards for destroying the amazing and huge statue of Buddha and hanging people in a soccer stadium from a crane.

  Thus is the tolerance and love of Islam.

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

    So are you condoning hanging people from a crane in a soccer stadium? Destroying all forms of religious art that do not glorify Islam is perfectly acceptable?

    And the way to answer the alledged ethnic cleansing of Palestine is by killing Koreans in Afghanistan?

    Reply

    2 Replies

    • 0%

      djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

      Answer the question.

      Because the Jews alledgedly oppress one single people (who are really Syrians) does that give every single Muslim in the entire world the right to rape, pillage, and plunder just because?

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%

        blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

        Yes, djrevelky, destruction of the magnificent Bamiyan Buddhas by the Taliban was a frightening insight into the mentality of these men.

        They attack the past, as well as the present and future.

        Reply
• 0%

  pcknowledge1 year, 1 month ago

  When the coveted oil stops flowing there. Which will be never...

  Reply
• 0%

  saintetienne1 year, 1 month ago

  "When will there ever be peace in the middle east?"

  Boo hoo.... NEVER.

  The region is full of nasty, hostile people who can't seem to rise above their low self-esteem and their Napoleon complex. Mix in a loopy, rabid religion, lots of weaponry, a drug trade and billions in oil revenue, and you've got a recipe for one f***ed-up region.

  Good luck, but we won't be seeing peace over there for a long, LONG time. Oh well, I live in America, so what do I care? That's their problem! :)

  Reply
• 0%

  schillinfl11 year, 1 month ago

  Don't fret. The War on Terror is just a bumper sticker slogan!

  Reply
• 0%

  pcknowledge1 year, 1 month ago

  I wonder is some of you know the Taliban are the same people Reagan called "freedon fighters" when they were fighting the Soviets.

  Reagan & the CIA wanted Bin Ladin & the Taliban to oust the Soviets not out of the "goodness of their heart," but because the Middle East has oil and Reagan was afraid the Soviets would start controlling the oil if they won & took over Afghanistan & eventually nearby regions.

  Islam has nothing to do with russian & western interference in the Middle East. Oil is the only reason.

  Kashmir has been in deep conflict since yrs, neither the russians nor any western country has ever been interested in that region. And the interesting thing is, more Al Qaida terrorists are in Kashmir then in Iraq (embedded with the ISI & the Taliban).

  Reply

  3 Replies

  • 0%

    saintetienne1 year, 1 month ago

    pcknownothing,

    News Flash: The world changes, alliances change, interests change. It's called politics.

    Of course we called them "freedom fighters". It bolstered their already fragile egos and made them want to participate in our fight against the Soviet Union back in the '80s. If the Taliban were too proud and too stupid (and they were) to figure out that they were being used as pawns in a game between the U.S. and Russia, whose fault is it? Not ours. They could have refused. But they didn't. Like anyone else, they saw $$ to be had.

    Unfortunately, their stupidity continues. Instead of cooperating with us and benefitting from oil production and trade, not to mention looking toward the U.S. as a model for developing democracy, free enterprise, technological advancements, medical breakthroughs, human rights and an overall better way of life, they choose radical religion, violence, weaponry, repression, poverty and obscene living conditions.

    STOO-PID.

    Reply
  • 0%

    djrevelky1 year, 1 month ago

    The Taliban were not the ones the United States supported! That is an out and out lie and you know better.

    The group the United States supported against the Soviet Union became the Northern Alliance. The same Northern Alliance that had Osama in their grasp when Clinton let him go.

    The same Northern Alliance who was decimated because, in typical modern Democrat fashion, we abandoned our allies.

    Oh how I long for the party of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy...they might not have always been right but they protected our allies and stood up against evil.

    Reply

    1 Reply

    • 0%

      blinkers1 year, 1 month ago

      Largely correct, Ahmad Massoud and the Mujahedin were supported by the West -- once the Taliban gained ascendancy, and their true colors revealed for the world to see, Western support for these medieval militiamen soon dried up.

      PS, How could Clinton have let OBL go, when he never had him apprehended in the first place? Just wondering.

      Reply
• 0%

  jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago

  You've done the math and the answer is clear. NOBODY! I agree absolutely. However, this argument assumes that mutually assured destruction (NOBODY winning) is a sufficient deterent as it was during the cold war. Given the nature of at least some elements of Islamic culture and its clear ability to motivate individuals to sacrifice themselve to a certain death, it is doubtful that one can rest easy on the concept of deterrence. To the western mind, the battle would be stupid. Are you fully and absolutely convinced that it would be to the jihadist mind.

  By the way, Daylight, one does not need intimate knowledge of Islam to observe this.

  Reply