But honestly pxmcc tried to make it political from the very first post. But granted, the folks tat actually executed the kill deserve all the credit. Politics aside. Originally Posted by CryptKickersure crypt. makes perfect sense..
....the people that were tracking him for 15 years deserve the credit for finding him. That starts with Clinton, ... Originally Posted by targaman85He wasn't known until after 911, so how could "Clinton" be tracking him while he was President. The courier was not an issue with respect to the attempt to down a WTC building in Clinton's administration. His identity was provided after some "enhanced interrogation" techniques begun in Eastern Europe.
‘Joe, what do you think?’Bitten didn't want to do the raid, because it might cost the "Presidency" for Obaminable, which means the VP for Bitten.
“And I said, ‘You know, I didn’t know we had so many economists around the table.’ I said, ‘We owe the man a direct answer. Mr. President, my suggestion is don’t go. We have to do two more things to see if he’s there.’”
that was an utterly idiotic move. Originally Posted by pxmccTaking out one of the worlds most notorious terrorist who was responsible for the deaths of untold thousands (many of whom were American) is idiotic? Then again, I could see where a typical lib would share the same ideology.....Tebow knows O shipped them over a many pallet-o-cash.....
LL, see attached link to declassified documents indicating that we surely knew of OBL prior to 9/11/01. Originally Posted by targaman85Are you making up some false narrative in an effort to discredit my postings? Do you see any statement by me on this board (or this thread) that indicates I believe that "we" didn't know about OBL prior to 9/11/01?
Are you making up some false narrative in an effort to discredit my postings? Do you see any statement by me on this board (or this thread) that indicates I believe that "we" didn't know about OBL prior to 9/11/01?Apparently, you seem to "think" I believe our intelligence and law enforcement communities didn't know about OBL until after the Bush administration. I'm uncertain as to what leads you to that erroneous conclusion, but save it.
Let me save you some time, and I don't need alleged "unclassified" documents .... a 1998 indictment during the Clinton administration is sufficient, and I've posted that numerous times on this site.
"Reading" .... on what? Have you read the indictment? Originally Posted by LexusLover
Apparently, you seem to "think" I believe our intelligence and law enforcement communities didn't know about OBL until after the Bush administration. I'm uncertain as to what leads you to that erroneous conclusion, but save it.
Our discussion was as the OP says: Bush had no intel on OBL to give Obaminable.
You just made him a liar. Thank you! Or are you the OP? Originally Posted by LexusLover
He wasn't known until after 911, so how could "Clinton" be tracking him while he was President. . Originally Posted by LexusLover
Taking out one of the worlds most notorious terrorist who was responsible for the deaths of untold thousands (many of whom were American) is idiotic? Then again, I could see where a typical lib would share the same ideology.....Tebow knows O shipped them over a many pallet-o-cash..... Originally Posted by Russ38Soleimani was a uniformed Irani officer, maybe comparable to the Special ops command in our military, who was invited as a guest of honor and military trainer/strategist to Iraq by the Iraqi government to help shut down Islamic State, Al Qaeda and some Sunni radicals allied with Al Qaeda/ISIS. Trump taking him out was an idiotic move, and could have resulted in Iraq straight up kicking us out, stronger Iraqi Iran ties, a payback assassination of a high-ranking U.S. officer, and possibly war with Iran's million man army, which is nothing like Iraq. This had 0 in common with the bin Laden takedown and the Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi assassination, both of which were justified and excellent moves. Calling Soleimani a terrorist is just straight-up factually incorrect, like calling a senior Russian general a terrorist. You may not like him, but that doesn't make him a terrorist or a direct threat to the U.S.
You show the depth of your lack of knowledge and engraved bias.so, in your opinion, torture is consistent with the ethos of the world's greatest democratic republic? waterboarding-making someone feel like they are drowning-is ok as long as it leads to a (coerced btw and therefore unreliable) confession? and when our troops get captured as pows, we shouldn't worry about the hostile nation returning the favor? do we have the moral high ground, or are we barbarians like our enemies?
BTW:
Why you dredge up these stale claims that aren't historically supported is beyond me .... Are you needing attention?
Here's the ending ... of the INVESTIGATION that began in 2002 under the Bush administration and he was being tracked during the second term of the Bush administration ...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-13300680
Detained prisoners began to disclose his identity as a consequence of special interrogation techniques utilized during the Bush administration in Eastern Europe. If you read the article it is claimed he owned the house and maintained utility connections.
A courier was followed to the house and that courier had been "under watch" for years before Obaminable was elected.
As an aside it is my recollection that Your Man Bitten was opposed to the raid as being risky for Obaminable's re-election chances if it failed .... kinda like your Man Carter and the Iranian disaster.
You and yours can't destroy and rewrite all history. Live with it. Originally Posted by LexusLover
Soleimani was a uniformed Irani officer, maybe comparable to the Special ops command in our military, who was invited as a guest of honor and military trainer/strategist to Iraq by the Iraqi government to help shut down Islamic State, Al Qaeda and some Sunni radicals allied with Al Qaeda/ISIS. Trump taking him out was an idiotic move, and could have resulted in Iraq straight up kicking us out, stronger Iraqi Iran ties, a payback assassination of a high-ranking U.S. officer, and possibly war with Iran's million man army, which is nothing like Iraq. This had 0 in common with the bin Laden takedown and the Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi assassination, both of which were justified and excellent moves. Calling Soleimani a terrorist is just straight-up factually incorrect, like calling a senior Russian general a terrorist. You may not like him, but that doesn't make him a terrorist or a direct threat to the U.S.You should double check your facts......
plus the dude looked like sean connery's james bond. so there's that.. Originally Posted by pxmcc
You should double check your facts......who publishes this iran focus, some right wing think tank? never heard of it.
https://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-an...-in-syria/?amp Originally Posted by Russ38
