Re: "Next you will be telling us that OBL and Saddam were in cahoots together.....best buddies hanging out at the mosque together"
No, next I'll repeat that you falsely implied Osama hasn't had Iraq on his talking points list. Fair enough? Apparently not, LOL.
Re: "Whether OBL or not OBL had Iraq on his talking points since 1998 [and I have yet to see proof of that], what difference does it make?"
Since you are hellbent on pretending it isn't so, ask yourself what motivates YOU, for an answer to that. But since you asked me, I just say it means your notion(you know, the one we were discussing?) that Osama wouldn't be supportive of Saddam's Iraq or vice versa, particularly in a quest to attack America, isn't nearly as strong a theory as you think it is.
Re: "You really are starting to disappoint."
How do you feel now?
Re: "the Islamic terrorist group, Ansar al-Islam, has grown in strength according to your fave, D. Rumsfeld, since we attacked Iraq."
Funny he doesn't actually say that in the link you provide but don't quote from. Try reading both it and the actual memo, and you'll find Rumsfeld says "Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?"
Rumsfled asks a question, and states that we don't know. He does not say Ansar al-Islam is stronger(as you claim), and he pointedly does not ever say that(even if they are) the threat wouldn't be still larger if not for our efforts. He in fact certainly seems to believe the threat is smaller for our efforts(wonders!), as he says "we have have made many sensible, logical moves in the right direction, but are they enough?
You simply told a lie about what Rumsfeld has said(knowingly or not). He's said nothing that would indicate he'd disagree with me when I say the terrorists are a bit under the weather these days, no matter how firmly you pretend he's indicated otherwise. All you have to do is read, and comprehend the truth he's told.
Re: "Who's right? You or Rumsfeld?"
Since he's said nothing in disagreement with my comments, perhaps in our agreement we both are right.
Re: "What else do you know little about?"
Have some more false statements you'd like to create and find yourself eating? You seem to be having a steady diet of those, though you haven't shown the cahones to admit it(rather, you ignore it).
Re: "If anything, the pre emptive attack on Iraq has made OBL's convictions just that much stronger."
I'm confident(as I've noted to you before) from having read some of OBL's past statements, that his convictions could not become stronger than they have been for years, and I suspect strongly that Rumsfeld, for one of millions, agrees.
Oh, here's but one incidence of what you haven't read Osama say, from back in '98: "in the siege against the Muslim people of Iraq, we have nothing new to add to the previous message."
One previous message: "America heads the list of aggressors against Muslims. The recurrence of aggression against Muslims everywhere is proof enough" --O.B.L '98(i.e. after Clinton mollified him, lol).
pbs.org
Dan B |
