Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Road Walker who wrote (210067)	11/2/2004 1:13:09 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 1573984

No, it's not. We didn't even send in the Special Forces. Special forces were used extensivly in Afghanistan and against Al Qaeda. If we had focused on getting the top al Qaeda leadership, and used all the resources at our disposal, we would have had them. War isn't so simple and certain. The enemy responds to what you do, and luck also plays a role. Often attacking quickly is more important then mustering all of your forces. PS The proof is in the result. That is a very illogical statement. The fact that we didn't capture or kill bin Laden isn't proof that we would have had we done something different. Would you have imagined that 3 years after 9/11 we would be watch bin Laden lecture our President on TV? I certainly thought such a thing was possible. Countries can hunt for one specific person and never find him or even his remains after he dies of old age many years later. I did think we would hit Al Qaeda hard and we did, but I never was sure that we would get bin Laden. Nor did I think getting bin Laden was the most important objective. If we do get him it will be a good thing but it would only be a small part of the overall campaign against Al-Qaeda. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next