Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
Appreciate the reply and agree on the facts you post... however, I disagree that "establishing the waterboarding approach" means that Bush played a large part in killing OBL. It was reported that since 2008, there's been a significant amount of surveillance and discover missions. Authorization of such tactical missions in another country's sovereign territory typically can come from no one other than the President and his staff.
I must be getting stupider and stupider then because you've said that at least a half dozen times. (yeah, opening the door wide there)
Pearl Harbor was a nation-sanctioned attack on our country and an obvious act of war by an obvious party.
9/11 was an act of war by a terrorist network who did not have any directly sponsored/authorization to attack the US. Yes, the Taliban turned a blind eye to OBL's network.
Iraq had *literally* absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Not a single thing.
Pearl Harbor is not the same as 9/11. Neither Pearl Harbor nor 9/11 are the same as the invasion of Iraq. You're comparing Apples to Oranges.
Very few people spoke out because of the "detailed, accurate intelligence" that was presented for Iraq's sponsorship of terrorism and "advanced WMD programs". "Facts" which have been consistently proven false.
Listen, please don't take any of this as an attack on the Men and Women who risk their lives every day for us. As a country, we are eternally indebted to the work that our servicemen like yourself have done. Hell, in 2004, I tried to sign up for OCS and was medically declined. Went through a whole appeals process and the Marines ultimately said no.
At times, I'll vehemently disagree with your opinions and comments, but there is certainly a deeply-seated appreciation and gratitude for your service.
|
First, I would NEVER take anything you said as an attack on our military. If I thought you were capable of doing that, I wouldn't debate you.
"I disagree that "establishing the waterboarding approach" means that Bush played a large part in killing OBL."
I don't know that I'd say Bush played a "large role" either. But in my opinion, he did way more to complete the task than Obama, who pretty much just happened to be there when it all came to fruition.
"9/11 was an act of war by a terrorist network who did not have any directly sponsored/authorization to attack the US"
You are correct. The war on terror, in many ways, cannot be categorized and compartmentalized the way wars historically have been. As you said, it's not sovereign nations that are attacking us. But the American victims on 09/11 are every bit as dead as the American victims of Pearl Harbor, and their families deserve the same expectation of justice.
"Very few people spoke out because of the "detailed, accurate intelligence" that was presented for Iraq's sponsorship of terrorism and "advanced WMD programs". "Facts" which have been consistently proven false."
Most Democrat senators voted to invade Iraq, and they all know that intelligence gathering is not, has never been, and never will be, an exact science. Bill Clinton said many times that it was certain that Saddam had WMDs. It just seems unspeakably cowardly to me to support the war when it was popular, and then act like you never did when it becomes unpopular. I'm not saying it's wrong to change your mind when more data becomes available. But I think that everyone who supported the war at the time, is equally responsible for it. I don't like it when politicians RETROACTIVELY wash their hands of the mess, and almost everyone who did that is a democrat.
"Iraq had *literally* absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Not a single thing."
Agreed. Iraq also repeatedly violated the terms of the treaty that ended the first Gulf War, which Saddam also started. In my opinion, you don't want to give tyrants a free pass for that sort of thing. That sets a bad precedent.