Jackal wrote:]Wow, I'm impressed. Not only did I get a compliment from you but you actually didnt freak out & post...LOCKED!
Guess those "Counseling for Moderators with a clenched fist & locking addiction" events really helped. Congratulations. The first step to recovering is admitting you have a problem.
*Tear*, I'm so proud of you.
I can tell you're quite knowledgeable of logic and debate.
Anyways, that just goes to show that people that talk alot aren't afraid of acting out. I know you'd like them to be, but unfortunately not everyone is alike.
...
Oh, so because he made those tapes & actually made threats to attack, he won't? Only if he hadn't mentioned anything, then he would attack? Pff, the FBI, CIA & all of them are squirming for no reason. National security has been tightened for no reason, Bin Laden already made a tape, this means he wont attack. Silly governments, thinking he actually might be a threat.
When you want to do as much damage to someone as possible, you don't warn them in advance. That's common sense.
Saddam Hussein released several tapes in the months leading up to his capture. When the military found him, he was hiding in a hole in the ground, malnutritioned and asking the troops not to hurt him.
Same thing.
Alright, I know it's not the same thing, but I'd like to bring up what transpired between you & me here for a moment.
This is an internet message board. In a real fight, where people really get injured and die, things are different. Do you disagree?
Thanks for the history re-cap. The Soviets & the Americans decided not to attack eachother. Don't formulate it in such a way as if to say the Soviets were afraid.
If they weren't afraid, then why did the Soviets, by their own later admission, construct thousands of fake missile silos during the Cold War to make their army seem more formidable?
Why did Khrushchev back down first in the Cuban Missile Crisis? Why did he concede to Kennedy's demands then later be angry that he "lost face" in front of the world?
They could've been patient, right? They could've stuck to looking for Bin Laden, right? No, they decided to go after Saddam.
How long would you consider patient? How long would you have proposed the U.S. wait before attacking?
You know that with your logic, you would've protested the U.S. removing Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda from power before 9/11. Because Bin Laden hadn't struck yet, he was just a terrorist leader who hated the U.S. and had a history of violent attacks.