OK - I've got a problem w/ this ..

[TenSecondSnake]

The father of the marine who was killed yesterday appeared on TV blaming George W Bush for the loss???

I feel for the guys grief and loss but c'mon. He sure as shit was not drafted and it was'nt summer camp he signed up for. Its the god damned armed forces. If you don't accept the possible fate that may arise you've no biz signing up. You would think the father of a soldier would have more respect for the armed forces than to turn on the commander in chief. Especially in a time like this. News coverage int he last few days has made me sick. Flag burnings, protests, demonstrations.

Its one thing to disagree with whats going on. But to not suport our troops is just pathetic in my opinion.

[whiteboy]

I saw it, I agree his father should be pround , notcursing president bush!

[TexasDevilDog]

ug. He is not thinking of his son. What would his son be saying about this situation? He would not be blaming the President.

[line-em-up]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how not wanting a war is the same as not supporting our troops. A lot of people fully support our troops without wanting a war.

And how does not supporting the war mean they're not patriotic or that they're being anti-american? That's confusing too. Maybe they are concerned about all of the collateral damage. People had a fit when Timothy McVeigh refered to the innocent as "collateral damage" when he declared war, yet those same people want Iraq, and whomever else is next on the list, to be turned into a parking lot.

Maybe the father is one of the 34% of the people that don't believe that war is/was necessary. Maybe he feels like his son shouldn't have been over there in harms way in the first place. I'm sure he is proud of his son and would have had no problem with him dying in a war that was necessary.

Anyway, I'm sure I will get flamed and be labeled an anti-american, non-partriotic, traiter, liberal, or whatever other label people can come up with, but I am a little confused on how stuff keeps getting twisted around.

May God be with our servicemen as well as the innocent women and children that are in danger.

signed,
A full supporter of our servicemen.
William

[Paladin]

I'm sure he is proud of his son and would have had no problem with him dying in a war that was necessary.

Well I have a problem with this statement from you, but I am not going to criticize the man after his son was killed. He is one of the few who has earned the right to speak his mind, IMO.

I also don't think you can be a FULL supporter of the troops with those statements. Once war starts I think negative statements, even subtle ones, are not showing support, even democratic congressmen were saying that today.

Just my .02

[TexasDevilDog]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure he is proud of his son and would have had no problem with him dying in a war that was necessary.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Regardless, it is his son's decision to join the Armed Forces and to fight in the war. I am saying that, unless the son said that he didn't want to fight there, then the father should not say anything against what is going on, because he will be going against his son's wishes.

Untill someone asks him what his son thought about being there, I will continue to think that he is doing his son wrong.

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by 90 Notch
Well I have a problem with this statement from you, but I am not going to criticize the man after his son was killed. He is one of the few who has earned the right to speak his mind, IMO.

I also don't think you can be a FULL supporter of the troops with those statements. Once war starts I think negative statements, even subtle ones, are not showing support, even democratic congressmen were saying that today.

Just my .02

Upon re-reading the quote, I should have said "I'm sure he is proud of his son and would have had no problem with him dying in a war that HE FELT was necessary.", since I am not against the war. I'm just trying to look at it the way that he may see it.

I understand what you mean about negative statements after the war starts. We need to rally around and let the soldiers know that we are behind them 100% and pray for them. I have always supported the troops. (I have a personal understanding of the neccessity after hearing my dad talk about how people spit on him and called him a baby killer when he came back from Vietnam. He didn't even get an official "welcome home".)

Anyway, that does not mean that I can't have reservations about whether or not we should be over there. I have been trying to make since out of everything in a LOGICAL manner instead of saying, "Yea!!!! Let's nuke em!". I just get tired of all of the cowboy gung ho attitudes and the bashing of anybody that cares more about human life than just kicking ass.

I definitely believe we should get Sadam and his sons and cronies out of there. I just hate to see innocent people get killed. Is there anything wrong with that?

Thanks for understanding,
William

[Paladin]

Well Bush is responsible for the war, and I think the dad is mistaken that Bush is responsible for his sons death. Saddam is responsible for all the deaths IMO. I did not want a war, but I support totally that we went in, I think it was the right thing to do. I hope the dad is just so grief stricken that he is saying things out of grief. I just find it hard to criticize the man so soon after his son is dead. I am a father and I do not wish on anyone that they outlive their child.

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by TexasDevilDog
Regardless, it is his son's decision to join the Armed Forces and to fight in the war. I am saying that, unless the son said that he didn't want to fight there, then the father should not say anything against what is going on, because he will be going against his son's wishes.

Untill someone asks him what his son thought about being there, I will continue to think that he is doing his son wrong.

Good point of view. I'm sure he is hurting really bad right now and trying to deal with the loss. He may regret saying it later. I have a little girl, and I can't imagine how I would cope with losing her.

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by 90 Notch
Well Bush is responsible for the war, and I think the dad is mistaken that Bush is responsible for his sons death. Saddam is responsible for all the deaths IMO. I did not want a war, but I support totally that we went in, I think it was the right thing to do. I hope the dad is just so grief stricken that he is saying things out of grief. I just find it hard to criticize the man so soon after his son is dead. I am a father and I do not wish on anyone that they outlive their child.

I totally agree. My sister lost her only daughter about 2 years ago. Though I felt for her then, I couldn't begin to understand how she felt until I later had my first child. There is absolutely NOTHING that I wouldn't do to protect my little girl from harm.

[TenSecondSnake]

I'm not even certain that I myself feel the war is completely correct. But myself and the 34% of americans probably don't have all the facts. All we can do is hope the people we put into office do the job. The decisions have been made and now I think the time is high for offering full support and hope for the best outcome.

HOWEVER - for the guys over there laying it on the line to see or hear about all of the protests and demonstrations. I feel that is disrespectful. Whats done is done - they're there. And thats all that matters at this point.

I think these protests are a hell of a lot more bandwagoning than anything else. I've spoke with maybe 5 ppl in full objection to the war. And none of them seemed to know anything they were talking about. You MUST assume that there are things that Bush and the cabinet know that we do not.

When the men and women who provide the veil of safety and freedom you enjoy are somewhere laying their lives on the line. And your in the street burning the US flag - you should get drop kicked into mexico and have your citizenship revoked. Go live somewhere else. Like france for instance. How quickly ppl forget their fathers cries for help when panzer tanks lined the streets of paris. IMO the whole freeworld owes the US one - whatever type of oppresion or tyranny we chose to face, france and western europe should do nothing more than shut up and offer their support. Its our policy of butting our nose into others biz that provides the freedom to NOT be speaking german right now.

[Paladin]

A war post without getting personal and calling people names, no way! LOL

[line-em-up]

While I have my reservations about the validity of the war, I would NEVER stoop so low as burning the flag. The flag represents the foundation and spirit that this country was built on. While I'm always bitchin and complaining about the gov, etc, etc, I feel this is the best country by far.

I am also not standing up FOR the people that are protesting as much as I am their right to speak their mind. It's kind of a paradox. They have the right to, yet they are ostricized ?sp for expressing their feelings.

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by 90 Notch
A war post without getting personal and calling people names, no way! LOL

LOL, This does seem strange. I figured it would quickly turn into a flamefest. Thanks guys for sharing your thoughts with me in an intelligent manner.

[Cooter]

a large percentage of the troops WANT to be over there getting rid of Saddam... so by supporting the troops, you're supporting the war since the troops support the war.

don't get it twisted with your little PC spin...

Forrest

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by Forrest
a large percentage of the troops WANT to be over there getting rid of Saddam... so by supporting the troops, you're supporting the war since the troops support the war.

don't get it twisted with your little PC spin...

Forrest

I'm sure there are a lot of blood thirsty people in the military, since that gives them an outlet. But, most people are there to serve their country and follow their orders, whatever they may be. That doesn't mean they WANT to kill. Killing is not something that a sane person can do without a certain amount of sorrow. That is, unless they are heartless.

By using your logic, since I buy oil for my car, I'm supporting Saddam, since he sells oil. And if I support Saddam, then I am giving aid to the enemy. So buying oil and gas for my car is going against the troops. Especially if I have a gas guzzler.

Also, I think we should get rid of Saddam too. I haven't said otherwise. I am just trying to make since out of all of this. Not trying to start an argument.

[Paladin]

There is not always sense to be made of someone so evil. Some people believe there is good in everyone, I don't. There are a few people in this world who have NO good in them. Saddam is in that group. Trying to make sense of that would make a decent person crazy unless they understand that some people do not have the capacity to be rational or good.

[GTek]

They can't wait to stick a camera in someones face immediately after something terrible like this happens. People need time to themselves so they can morn thier loss and get thier thoughts together.


Being that the guy was upset with Bush made it a huge bonus for them. (the news media)

[line-em-up]

The news media is the problem

True. Just like the Don Henley song, "Dirty Laundry".

[stangmang]

As a former Marine, we were trained to survive and kill. I am sick to hear this Marines father say that about Bush. I was yelling at the tv last night when i heard him say that.

Now in all honesty what is the difference in war and gangs in the streets shooting and killing innocent people? Why arent the anti war people in oak cliff or some other neighborhood protesting the killing of innocent people.. :eek:

[HookEm]

I definitely believe we should get Sadam and his sons and cronies out of there. I just hate to see innocent people get killed. Is there anything wrong with that?

Innocent people died when we liberated Auschwitz.
Innocent people died in the fight to end slavery.
Innocent people died when we kicked England's arse to the curb.
Innocent people died when we defeated the Japanese in WW2.
Innocent people die for the greater good in every war.

[Cooter]

Originally posted by HookEm
Innocent people died when we liberated Auschwitz.
Innocent people died in the fight to end slavery.
Innocent people died when we kicked England's arse to the curb.
Innocent people died when we defeated the Japanese in WW2.
Innocent people die for the greater good in every war.

best fucking post I've seen in a LONG time!!!

[Monsoon X]

If our troops have to fight it...............I support it.

But if you guys think that every soldier who's fighting wants to fight then you're naive.

It is very possible to think this war is stupid and still hope our boys and girls drag Saddam's butt across the desert.

[HookEm]

Originally posted by Monsoon X
If our troops have to fight it...............I support it.

But if you guys think that every soldier who's fighting wants to fight then you're naive.

It is very possible to think this war is stupid and still hope our boys and girls drag Saddam's butt across the desert.

Words like "Every" have no place in debate. It isnt exactly going out on a limb to say that somewhere, within the millions enlisted, that there is an objecter to the war.

Never the less, the amount that oppsoe it, are miniscule in number.
If you think otherwise, it is you that is naive.

Furthermore, it is not possible to think logically, and come up up with "the war is stupid." It just isnt. Were we stupid to liberate the Jews too? Hussein has slaughtered Kurds by the millions. It is stupid to oppose this war, that is just, and does hold water udner the Just War Theory.

[GT-40 GTS]

Originally posted by HookEm
Words like "Every" have no place in debate. It isnt exactly going out on a limb to say that somewhere, within the millions enlisted, that there is an objecter to the war.

Never the less, the amount that oppsoe it, are miniscule in number.
If you think otherwise, it is you that is naive.

Furthermore, it is not possible to think logically, and come up up with "the war is stupid." It just isnt. Were we stupid to liberate the Jews too? Hussein has slaughtered Kurds by the millions. It is stupid to oppose this war, that is just, and does hold water udner the Just War Theory.

Very well put by a newbie.

[Aaron Clopton]

he new what the hell he was signing up for you sure as hell dont join the MARINES and expect to not fight, but he new what he was signing up for so his dad needs to suck it up and move on. I'm really sorry for the guys father but i would be proud of my son. MARINES die thats what there here for but the MARINES CORPS lives forever there for you live forever... full metal jacket

[line-em-up]

Originally posted by HookEm
Innocent people died when we liberated Auschwitz.
Innocent people died in the fight to end slavery.
Innocent people died when we kicked England's arse to the curb.
Innocent people died when we defeated the Japanese in WW2.
Innocent people die for the greater good in every war.

When you put it that way, it makes more sense. I realize that freedom doesn't come without a price. The problem is deciding what that price is worth. After watching how things are going this weekend. It's nice to see that collateral damage is minimized. Although, more of our men may pay the price, which I hate to see.

As for this comment:
Concise, well put, STFU you liberal pukes.

Some people would rather label people and call names than to discuss things in a civilized manner. Perhaps it's because they have trouble putting words together and forming sentences.

[01WhiteCobra]

Originally posted by HookEm
Innocent people died when we liberated Auschwitz.
Innocent people died in the fight to end slavery.
Innocent people died when we kicked England's arse to the curb.
Innocent people died when we defeated the Japanese in WW2.
Innocent people die for the greater good in every war.

Innocent people died in Korea
Innocent people died in Vietnam
Innocent people died in Panama
Innocent people died in Afghanistan

Record ain't be too good last 50 years.

[HookEm]

Originally posted by 01WhiteCobra





Record ain't be too good last 50 years. [/B]

[QUOTE]Innocent people died in Korea
And now, South Korea has evolved into a more democratic society. As MacArthur predicted, Rhee was toppled by the Korean people when they found out the truth about him. Today, the South Korean people have a democratically elected president and are firmly on the path to a full democracy and a world-class economic power. The price of freedom.

Innocent people died in Vietnam
Yes, they did. We fought a poor strategy, and had we continued with bombing the crap out of em, instead of calling them off to reduce collateral damage, we'd have won, and far less innocents would have died.

Innocent people died in Panama
Huh? Now you're supporting Noriega? Panama's corrupt military suffered losses, but to my knowledge, no civilians died. To call them "innocent" is an aggregious sham.

Innocent people died in Afghanistan
Yes, it would have been the better path to allow the Taliban to continue harboring Al Queda and victimizing women in the manner they did.:rolleyes:
You actually supported leaving the Taliban in power? I guess you have that right but that's a path few others will take with you. Enjoy.

As to your openign remark, what have YOU done, to change the record of America, which you show so much disdain for, other than bitch, moan, complain? Not that there is anything wrong with that, as it is your right. But actions speak far louder than words, and if our country's actions have upset you so badly, maybe you should do somethign to attempt to change that.

[01WhiteCobra]

Originally posted by HookEm
And now, South Korea has evolved into a more democratic society. As MacArthur predicted, Rhee was toppled by the Korean people when they found out the truth about him. Today, the South Korean people have a democratically elected president and are firmly on the path to a full democracy and a world-class economic power. The price of freedom.


Yes, they did. We fought a poor strategy, and had we continued with bombing the crap out of em, instead of calling them off to reduce collateral damage, we'd have won, and far less innocents would have died.


Huh? Now you're supporting Noriega? Panama's corrupt military suffered losses, but to my knowledge, no civilians died. To call them "innocent" is an aggregious sham.


Yes, it would have been the better path to allow the Taliban to continue harboring Al Queda and victimizing women in the manner they did.:rolleyes:
You actually supported leaving the Taliban in power? I guess you have that right but that's a path few others will take with you. Enjoy.

As to your openign remark, what have YOU done, to change the record of America, which you show so much disdain for, other than bitch, moan, complain? Not that there is anything wrong with that, as it is your right. But actions speak far louder than words, and if our country's actions have upset you so badly, maybe you should do somethign to attempt to change that.

Hook 'em where in the fuck did I say I was supporting Noriega?

Go check out the aftermath of Panama after we removed another CIA friendly from power after he got full of himself.

Did I ever say I supported leaving the Taliban in power? Check out the aftermath in Afghanistan. The Taliban is regrouping.

Where in the fuck have I said I have and disdain for this country? I don't necessarily agree sometimes with what my government does. Unlike you I can separate America the people from America the government. I also can place two opposing thoughts in my head at the same time. Once you can do that, I can actually carry on a debate for you. Until then, you are a drone with his fingers in his ears, singing "Nana nana, I can't hear you, nana, nana" like a 3 year old.

Because I don't take the attitude of "America Love It Or Leave It", like you have so generously spewed forth, I must be some left wing liberal nutcase.

How fucking ironical you "America Love It Or Leave It" people are. This country was founded on revolt against a legitimate politial authority. America is the land of dissent and freedom. Loyalty to the state with an unthinking obedience is actually quite un-American.

Newflash, dude, I have worked more Republican campaigns in the state of Texas than elections you will vote in in your life. Guaran-fucking-teed.

[HookEm]

Originally posted by 01WhiteCobra
[quote]Hook 'em where in the fuck did I say I was supporting Noriega?
It was a safe inference. Normally, I would apologize for being wrong, but, taking your demeanor into account.....nah.


Go check out the aftermath of Panama after we removed another CIA friendly from power after he got full of himself.
Why don't you provide a source, instead of a claim? It gives your "Debate skills" far more credence.


Did I ever say I supported leaving the Taliban in power? Check out the aftermath in Afghanistan. The Taliban is regrouping.
Again, you implied it.What would you have had us to do? Do YOU have a solution, or just vulgarity laced, unsubstantiated rants?


Where in the fuck have I said I have and disdain for this country? I don't necessarily agree sometimes with what my government does. Unlike you I can separate America the people from America the government.

So, you have a problem with the Reagan and Bush admins, and, every other war time admin, it seems, for the last 50 years. Interesting that it's only war time admins.


I also can place two opposing thoughts in my head at the same time. Once you can do that, I can actually carry on a debate for you.

You can carry on a debate for me? Thanks, but, I'll pass. I can handle my side just fine.


Until then, you are a drone with his fingers in his ears, singing "Nana nana, I can't hear you, nana, nana" like a 3 year old.

And you say this because? Did I attack you? Nope. Did I curse you? Nope. Did I belittle you for having some wild opinons? Nope. Oh..that's right...it was YOU that did that. Name calling is the first bastion of the weak of arguement.


Because I don't take the attitude of "America Love It Or Leave It", like you have so generously spewed forth, I must be some left wing liberal nutcase.
REALLY? Please paste something I said that gave you that silly idea. I'll be waiting with baited breath for your retraction.


How fucking ironical you "America Love It Or Leave It" people are. This country was founded on revolt against a legitimate politial authority. America is the land of dissent and freedom. Loyalty to the state with an unthinking obedience is actually quite un-American. Ah, so tje libertarian in you comes out. What's the deal? Bitter at your party's performance since its inception?

Newflash, dude, I have worked more Republican campaigns in the state of Texas than elections you will vote in in your life. Guaran-fucking-teed.
Oh? I doubt that.
I worked my first campaign, in 1977, at the age of 6, appearing on a Leo Berman for Congress political ad. I have been involved in some aspect of campaign work ever since. Recently, I hav worked on Ed Harrison's campaing against Frost, several Gramm and Bailey campaigns, both Bush campaigns, a few Clements campaigns way back when, and a mulitidude of local (Tarrant County) precinct level elections. I worked on Perry's gubenatorial campaign, both Bush campaings, and Clayton Williams. as well. I have voted in every election since 1990. And I do mean every, whether it's school board, Presidential, mid-terms, state bonds/referendums..whatever. Been there, done that. I marched in Dallas when we were faced with Al "The Don" Goreleone stealing in election every weekend in November 2K, and even a few weekends we ventured to Austin to marach. Hell, my son is named after PResident Reagan. So don't start your "I'm a better Republican than you are because I have libertarian leanings." I suggest you study the individual platform planks, and learn what the platform is. I assure you that there are no planks that reference massive dissidence against Republican-elected administrations, nor does it advocate goose steeping, if you disagree with them.

[Cooter]

Originally posted by line-em-up
I'm sure there are a lot of blood thirsty people in the military, since that gives them an outlet. But, most people are there to serve their country and follow their orders, whatever they may be. That doesn't mean they WANT to kill. Killing is not something that a sane person can do without a certain amount of sorrow. That is, unless they are heartless.

By using your logic, since I buy oil for my car, I'm supporting Saddam, since he sells oil. And if I support Saddam, then I am giving aid to the enemy. So buying oil and gas for my car is going against the troops. Especially if I have a gas guzzler.

Also, I think we should get rid of Saddam too. I haven't said otherwise. I am just trying to make since out of all of this. Not trying to start an argument.

please re-read my post and tell me where I used the word "kill"

[01WhiteCobra]

Failure in Panama is tied the justification of decreasing illegal drug trafficing, corruption in government and their financial system and of course improving the lifes of the Panamian people. NONE of which has happened. The precision strike was responsible for 1000s of civilian casualties. Anti-American sentiment still runs rampant (probably more so then before 1989).


The narcotics certification process, as it is known, requires that the administration evaluate countries that have designated as major illicit drug-producing or drug-transit countries. The 2003 certification process puts the same 23 countries on the so-called Majors list that were on it in 2002: Afghanistan, The Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Thailand, Venezuela, and Vietnam.


http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/global/drugs/03013102.htm



major cocaine transshipment point and primary money laundering center for narcotics revenue; money-laundering activity is especially heavy in the Colon Free Zone; offshore financial center; negligible signs of coca cultivation; monitoring of financial transactions is improving; official corruption remains a major problem

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/pm.html

U.S. citizens are warned not to travel overland through the eastern area of Darien Province (beyond a line drawn from Punta Carreto in the Comarca de San Blas Province on the Atlantic coast, through Yaviza in the eastern Darien Province, to Punta Pina on the Pacific coast). This area encompasses parts of the Darien National Park as well as privately-owned nature reserves and tourist resorts. While no incidents have occurred at these resorts, U.S. citizens, other foreign nationals and Panamanian citizens have been the victims of violent crime, kidnapping and murder in this area.

In 2001, members of radical, anti-U.S. student groups seized and beat an American army officer without provocation.

http://travel.state.gov/panama.html

Yea, they LOVE us down there! They cleaned up their act beautifully since 1989!

As far as my inference to you being "A Love It Or Leave It" type of person, the inference is made in the same vain as you making the ascertain that I must support Noriega and the Taliban because I question our success in those conflicts. So you will receive no recant of my opinion, as I don't require one from you.

[NTOSVO]

This is NTOSVO's wife.

I am in the Army Reserves. I work as a civilian contractor to the Army. So I think I have a right to voice my opinion on this matter. First and foremost let me state for the record that more people have died in car accidents that in all the wars and conflicts combined.
Also, I would love to just go punch one of those anti-war activists square in the nose. See how pissed off they get, and if they would like to hit me back. I believe that alot of Americans have forgotten the devastation of 9-11-01. Because that is exactly what we are doing we are striking back. To the people who think this was is about oil, Al Queida and Saddam are in bed together. BELIEVE THAT!!!

[01WhiteCobra]

Originally posted by NTOSVO
This is NTOSVO's wife.

I am in the Army Reserves. I work as a civilian contractor to the Army. So I think I have a right to voice my opinion on this matter. First and foremost let me state for the record that more people have died in car accidents that in all the wars and conflicts combined.
Also, I would love to just go punch one of those anti-war activists square in the nose. See how pissed off they get, and if they would like to hit me back. I believe that alot of Americans have forgotten the devastation of 9-11-01. Because that is exactly what we are doing we are striking back. To the people who think this was is about oil, Al Queida and Saddam are in bed together. BELIEVE THAT!!!

Of course you have a right to voice your opinion on the matter.

Punching the activist in the nose, while probably, unfortunately, will get you thrown in prison, we would see just how "anti-violent" they are. Sometimes force is required, true.

I'm interested in your feelings that the war is strictly about 9/11. I know originally, the Bush administration made a hard case of Saddam and Al-Qaeda and ultimately, 9-11, but failed to make the link.

Trying to make a link between Bin Laden and Saddam would be certainly sway alot of public opinion, although I tend not to belief in it as they are so diametrically opposed, except for their hatred of America. Bin Laden views Saddam as a secular leader who has been oppressing his "people".

Has this link of Saddam and 9/11 been positively made?

[NTOSVO]

NTOSVO's wife

Trust me Al Queida and Hussein are in bed together. Where do you think bin Laden gets the financial support to train his guerillas(sp?), and get his equipment. We may have been a little delayed in our reaction, but the USA makes sure we have all our ducks in a row before we strike. And on the protestor example I know it will get you put in jail, I was trying to get a point across.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight; nothing he cares about more than his personal safety; is a miserable creature who has no chance of being freed, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

[01WhiteCobra]

Originally posted by NTOSVO
NTOSVO's wife

Trust me Al Queida and Hussein are in bed together. Where do you think bin Laden gets the financial support to train his guerillas(sp?), and get his equipment. We may have been a little delayed in our reaction, but the USA makes sure we have all our ducks in a row before we strike. And on the protestor example I know it will get you put in jail, I was trying to get a point across.


Don't worry, although I'm skeptical about the war, I feel the need to lay out some of the protestors as well.

As far as bin Laden and the money, even the US government has made the point of saying it is most likely from his family's money (his family built most of the royal's stuff in Saudi Arabia) and have made more connections to SA, then to Iraq. Also, some of the money is from misguided individuals thinking they are supporting charities when in fact they are supporting bin Laden (people from all over the globe, as well as America).