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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (118854)	11/7/2003 1:28:41 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

We weren't worried so much about conventional capability as unconventional capability... You just keep on changing your position left and right don't you? which brings me back to, what missions do you think the terrorists at Salman Pak were training for? There was nothing that corroborated what the captured enemy was saying. There was a fixed command and control facility there...that's not a terrorist activity; there were tanks and armoured personnel carriers there. Those aren't terrorist weapons. The hard facts [equipment and documention] show nothing other than a military training facility. The rest is rumor coming from a bunch of people that are more than happy to tell the US military what they want to hear. You can't believe captives; you can't believe informants; you can't believe defectors unless you can corroborate it with hard evidence. Which is why the General could only say it was an "impression". I suppose you can believe that the good general at CENTCOM doesn't have access to intel analysis. Not sure why you would but you can. jttmab