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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (68107)	5/23/2008 9:02:10 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 543149

I know somebody who landed on Peleliu with the Old Breed. He got shot, but later made two other amphibious landings.

To: quehubo who wrote (68107)	5/23/2008 9:41:43 PM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 543149

>>Dont you recall Peleliu I mentioned? Nimitz could not just let the Japanese sit on this Island and pass it. It had no strategic value. 10,000 casualties not needed to achieve the objective. Now is catching OBL necessary to achieve our objective? Tell me after 3-4 years of Obama in the WH.<< Quehebo - What is our objective? Isn't it, according to Bush, "winning the war on terror?" I agree that taking Peleliu was absolutely the wrong choice. As I pointed out in a post earlier today, the fact that audio tapes, videos, and messages from OBL and al Zawahiri continue to appear indicates clearly that they still have the ability to communicate with the outside world. That means they can still make plans, transmit those plans to others, and have them carried out. Furthermore, their continued existence, and their stream of threats and calls for Jihad make them potent symbols for fundamentalist Islamic radicals everywhere. Considering those two facts, it's pretty clear they remain a threat. So yes, catching them is necessary to achieve our objective, even if I don't accept Bush's definition of that objective. - Allen