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: Neocon who wrote (110068)	8/5/2003 8:41:28 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Cross border in afganistan if necessary may be vital. And help in iraq from allies, not the UN is what i have in mind. The neocon argument needs boosting from more traditional sources like Ralph Peters. I know it must have been pulled out of context, but wolfy saying iraq is the centerpiece of the war on terror, does not sell in peoria even if as we believe, terrorism/terror states post 9/11 must have had an epiphany on how much damage they could actually do if they worked together--sunni/shiite, iraq, iran etc.. Mike

To: Neocon who wrote (110068)	8/5/2003 11:56:23 AM
From: Rascal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I do not think that we have ever taken our eyes off al- Qaida, these have been separate operations. According to Time Magazine: Monday, Aug. 04, 2003 Letting Up On Osama Special forces previously in Afghanistan are moved out to Iraq By MICHAEL DUFFY AND MASSIMO CALABRESI George W. Bush hadn't mentioned Osama bin Laden's name in months, but he said recently that the U.S. was "slowly but surely" dismantling bin Laden's terrorist operation. As the hunt for Saddam Hussein intensifies, some U.S. officials are suggesting that the focus on the former leader of Iraq has come at the cost of eliminating the eccentric Saudi millionaire behind the 9/11 attacks. For nearly two years, bin Laden has been on the run in isolated parts of Afghanistan and eastern Pakistan, U.S. officials believe, staying out of sight, relying on the help of local tribes and traveling only in very small groups of devoted followers. Last fall, as the U.S. began planning the invasion of Iraq, Washington shifted many of its highly classified special-forces units and officers who had been hunting bin Laden in Afghanistan, moving them to Iraq, where they performed covert operations before the war began. By December many of the 800 special-forces personnel who had been chasing al-Qaeda for a year were quietly brought back home, given a few weeks' rest and then shipped out to Iraq. "They all basically picked up and moved," says a senior U.S. official. When the A-team members left, they took a lot of their high-tech equipment (and Arabic speakers) with them. And while they were replaced by fresh troops, many of the new units comprise reservists who, rather than specializing in countering Islamic threats, were trained for operations in Russian-and Spanish-speaking countries. The Administration was warned by skeptics inside the government that the switch-out would take some of the pressure off al-Qaeda, but the impending war with Iraq — which emphasized special forces as no war plan ever did before — took precedence over all other issues last winter at the Pentagon. Now some have come to believe that the change in emphasis allowed bin Laden to disperse to other parts of the world operatives who survived the initial months on the run. "The reason these guys were able to get away," says a former Bush official, "was because we let up." NC, I know you have shared here that you don't read every post. In the interest of efficient communication and thread bloat reduction,let me know if you don't read this one. I will then know not to respond to you in the future about your opinions about US deployments against AL Queda vs. US deployments against Iraq. It will save me a lot of time., Rascal @TIA.com