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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (205280)	10/5/2004 5:28:03 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573537

It may be a bit late now. If 100,000 troops had been sent in as soon as possible, say within 6 months of 9/11 they could have wrapped up pretty much all of Al Qaeda and probably got matching troops from Europe to help. Now Junior has neither the military might nor the support necessary to defeat our enemy. TP

To: TimF who wrote (205280)	10/5/2004 8:05:21 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573537

re: You want to send 100,000+ additional American soldiers in to Afghanistan and Pakistan? I'm not so sure that it would be a good idea. I'm also fairly sure that it wasn't going to happen with or without an invasion of Iraq. Bush had the opportunity, at Tora Bora, to wipe out the vast majority of al Qaeda. He passed. These are the only guys that are capable of real international terrorism. bin laden is the only guy that has ever hit the US in it's history. He passed. He had the chance to avenge the 9/11 victims. He passed. Now they have spread throughout the world. While we play the quagmire game in Iraq. Frankly, they have us pinned down. Explain to me again, what are we doing in Iraq in resonse to 9/11? John