Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (8088)	10/29/2001 2:17:23 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

he should have been protected by our elite Special Forces where ever he went... Actually, I'm glad they weren't with him. Considering spies within Haq's own inner circle tipped off the Taliban to his presence, our guys would have been waxed right along with him... I don't want our boys going anywhere where we have to relied upon Afghanis for OPSEC. They have just too many divided, or rentable, loyalties. Besides, how would it have looked had Haq come into Afghanistan surrounded by US bodyguards... Wouldn't THAT have reeked of "CIA" involvement... It wouldn't have altered the outcome one bit, except that we'd have American boys being executed along with him. Hawk

To: stockman_scott who wrote (8088)	10/29/2001 7:52:54 PM
From: Selectric II	Respond to of 281500

...IMHO, he [Haq] should have been protected by our elite Special Forces where ever he went... Who are we to dictate what he or any other Afghan does, and how, especially in their own country? It's been said he went despite our imploring him not to go. He was a local leader, who knew the situation much better than we did. We relied on his intelligence and experience more than he did on ours. He took a calculated risk and lost. On his own. We weren't his nanny. IT'S NOT OUR FAILURE, IT WAS HIS. IT ONLY ADVERSELY AFFECTS OUR INTERESTS As to nailing the Al Qaeda leadership, just harken back to the Versace murder here in the USA. The whole country was in a panic for weeks while the killer was on the loose, and everybody knew what he looked like and was on the lookout. I think we're doing the best we can, and a damn good job of it. I also think the claims that the bombing is counter-productive are motivated by buying into the Taliban's propaganda. If we are lacking in any area at all, it's the propaganda arena, and part of that is because our media has summoned all its power and influence to bring to light and criticize every single episode that might bring our actions into question, so they can fill up airtime and compete with each other for ratings. This seems unprecedented, even compared to Vietnam. Then, there were serious political questions about what we were fighting for and why. Here, we've been sneak-attacked by dirty fighters targeting and murdering innocent civilians -- and as of this evening there appear to be more on the way. Do you have a better suggestion than our already-limited and narrowly targeted bombing campaign? Please define "selectively" as it deviates from what we're already doing.