krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:09:34 PM new
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/16/wusa16.xml
Guess? 7:00 pm PDT
(reguess)
[ edited by krs on Sep 15, 2001 11:28 PM ]
|
hepburn
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:21:06 PM new
So now France and Germany are backing out? Why did they change their minds?
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:24:09 PM new
Why would Bin Laden stay there if he knows the U.S. will attack where he hides out? It just seems too soon IMO.
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:30:41 PM new
He won't stay put in any case. No telling where he is, but I hope that all of the gathered intelligence has a good idea.
|
ProudCanuck
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:34:56 PM new
I've just surfed most of my favorite news websites - cannot find any other mention of France and Germany 'backing out' their support for the United States.
I just cannot imagine why they would do this.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:35:14 PM new
So now France and Germany are backing out? Why did they change their minds?
Because they're p*ssies.
In America's coming "war against terrorism" they also must inform France and Germany that they have to immediately stop their little game of providing regimes with the nuclear rope that will hang them (and us). Or face consequences.
Bin Laden? He's probably in Brooklyn.
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:38:52 PM new
Posing as a flasher.
|
ProudCanuck
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:41:09 PM new
Still don't know how to make clickable links, sorry:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/09/14/oakley.analysis/index.html
"Alain Richard, the French defence minister, was quick to stress that it was a “political declaration” and refused to use the word war to describe the attacks on the U.S. Rudolf Scharping, his German counterpart, also insisted: “We do not face a war.”
The German constitution requires the seeking of parliamentary approval before any troops are committed and Scharping has suggested German support might be limited to medical facilities. "
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:43:21 PM new
France has always been useless. And didn't Germany put up a lot of resistance to any reaction to the terrorist takeover during the Munich games?
|
BufPuf
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:45:43 PM new
It really ticks me off. If the shoe was on the other foot what would America do for these countries? We as a nation have helped them out many times in the past.
a stripper
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:46:13 PM new
Maybe it's because Bin Laden claims he will destroy any country that helps the U.S. against Afghanistan.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:47:14 PM new
France and Germany have a well-worn terrorist policy.
They capitulate. France and Germany wrote the book on negotiating with terrorists and fulfilling terrorist demands.
|
BufPuf
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:49:21 PM new
From personal experience I have found out during the difficult times, one finds out who exactly is their friend.
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:49:26 PM new
They don't have strippers in Brooklyn. Do they, James?
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:50:10 PM new
Of course they do.
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:52:25 PM new
Just checking. 
|
BufPuf
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:54:14 PM new
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 10:54:50 PM new
James, do you have any kind of wish that you were in the service right now?
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:00:20 PM new
Upon reflection, a member of NATO was attacked. If France and Germany will not fulfill their obligations (they should be thrown out of NATO (NATO has already invoked its Article 5 in this situation).
Well...... that's hard to say, Ken. Part of me says YES and part of me says "it's so nice and comfortable over here..." - which of course is hardly the case, really. That's just me being honest.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Sep 15, 2001 11:01 PM ]
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:06:05 PM new
I'm not understanding why Bin Laden's group would do this in the first place. He obviously knows if he attacked the U.S. in any way, they would attack back. If he hides out in Afghanistan and he knows they would be attacked, he must hate Afghanistan and all the people that live there. Why doesn't this make sense to me?
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:10:33 PM new
Because he is trying to provoke a war between the East and West. With Allah on his side, how can he lose?
Also, he's attacked the U.S. many times already in case that's forgotten.
Also, the purpose of terrorism is to destabilize. It's also to provoke response which will rally people.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Sep 15, 2001 11:12 PM ]
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:11:25 PM new
Whoever's out there is pumped right now. They've been briefed and they'r waiting. Every one of them wants to get some, and they're joking, playing cards, or just lying on a bunk quiet. Nobody's showing any fear.
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:17:46 PM new
It probably surprised them that the buildings came down. Who could've anticipated that who isn't a structural engineer?
|
BufPuf
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:30:33 PM new
kraftdinner
None of this is logical to me. What idiot would even think about attempting let alone actually aboard a plane after the ban was lifted?
What did he accomplish by attacking WTC and possibly the White House? What was his objective? I think he is so insane that he is not capable of thinking logically and is capable of doing other things such as using an A bomb (or more) within the borders of the USA.
Yes extremists of any given group are so far out in left field they can and do damage that are unimaginable which doesn't make sense to others.
|
jt-2007
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:47:36 PM new
"Also, the purpose of terrorism is to destabilize."
Or to destroy from the inside out.
T
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:52:31 PM new
It makes me wonder why now? Was he waiting all these years to attack the U.S. because he had a country backing him that has nuclear capabilities?
|
krs
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:56:13 PM new
He expects, and may have, widespread arab support now. The middle east hasn't been this volatile in a while.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 15, 2001 11:58:25 PM new
Is his alliance that big of a threat? If what you're saying is right, how will the U.S. know where to target?
|
cassiescloset
|
posted on September 16, 2001 12:05:53 AM new
France is the initial destination for those seeking to come to America illegally.
When I visited France earlier this year, I was shocked that no one bothered to check my passport or any other documents when I entered the country. The UK carefully checked all my identification.
Many of those with ultimate destinations to the US first go to France, and then try to make it across the English channel. Once in Great Britain, they try to catch a flight to Canada. It's smooth sailing once they get into Canada.
Years ago, they came through Mexico, but it is more difficult to illegally enter the US from Mexico than through Canada. It won't be so easy for us to go back and forth to Canada now.
|
krs
|
posted on September 16, 2001 12:23:09 AM new
kraftdinner,
This country has been at war for ten years and we started it. We attacked Iraq, who had done absolutely nothing to us, and we've killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians there since then with repeated bombings when they failed to adher to rules that we imposed, and through economic policies that have brought starvation level conditions which have killed more hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of completely uninvolved citizens. We have bombed using varying rules, we may have bombed for personal political reasons, meaning (before anyone asks) that we have bombed on the day of Monika Lewinsky's grand jury testimony, on the day of the settlement of the Paula Jones case, and we have bombed at the outset of the impeachment hearings of Bill Clinton. We have since bombed seemingly only to show a willingness to bomb, and every bomb has caused either destruction or death or in most cases both. For ten years we have brought war to others in Bosnia and other places I can't spell as well. We have caused easily ten, or twenty, a hundred, or thousands of times as much carnage as happened here tuesday. And through our stated policies we showed the arab world no sign that we might let up. Now a little bit of that war has been brought home to us and we find that we don't like it very much.
|
