White House press secretary Tony Snow resigns

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by Aikbach

There are just criticisms for certain, especially conservative ones, but it is a difficult job for any man, I think it is far too expedient to try and peg him for the world's woes. This planet hit the fan before he entered office and will continue to hit the fan on it's own merits long after he's left.

When I say I don't like the aftermath of the war I mean to say it is obvious the strategy was not long term with troop levels and the function that soldiers have been asked to assume is basically as police officers and not hunting down the enemy with all means necessary.

It is a difficult fight when you aren't allowed to do all you can and are capable of, regardless war is never pretty nor without heartache and setback and I believe it was a just fight. I pray for the troops everyday.

Well let's just get the obligitory..I support the troops out of the way...as all people have to say now a days if they question the War...lest we be brandised...Un-Patriotic...Or Un-American.

I have no problem with the troops.

I have a problem with their Commander-in-Chief.

I wanted and supported the President in going after Bin-Laden...the man who caused 9/11. AND I STILL DO!

But Iraq or Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. That's been proven by the 9/11 commission and of course the whole reason we went to War...WMD's...was obviously BS.

[Aikbach]

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

Well let's just get the obligitory..I support the troops out of the way...as all people have to say now a days if they question the War...lest we be brandised...Un-Patriotic...Or Un-American.

I have no problem with the troops.

I have a problem with their Commander-in-Chief.

I wanted and supported the President in going after Bin-Laden...the man who caused 9/11.

But Iraq or Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. That's been proven by the 9/11 commission and of course the whole reason we went to War...WMD's...was obviously BS.

Politely I'll have to disagree that Saddam was not an actor in terrorism, perhaps not 9/11 itself but a funder of various sects and organizations as well as one who painted various portraits of himself standing triumphantly before burning Trade Towers, so he wanted someone to believe he had a hand in it.

He also had an agenda, fancied himself the second coming of Nebuchadnezzar and di want weapons of mass destruction to be his, for crying out loud his own aides weren't aware they were missing or hidden.

Anyhow I'm not one to launch ad hominems without merit, so never fear i won't question your patriotism, I don't see the need to bark at a man I've never met and don't know by name on the internet.

I pray the troops fulfill their mission and return home safely.

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by Aikbach

Poliely I'll have to disagree that Saddam was not an actor in terrorism, perhaps not 9/11 itself but a funder of various sects and organizations as well as one who painted various portraits of himself standing triumphantly before burning Trade Towers, so he wanted someone to believe he had a hand in it.

He also had an agenda, fancied himself the second coming of Nebuchadnezzar and di want weapons of mass destruction to be his, for crying out loud his own aides weren't aware they were missing or hidden.

Anyhow I'm not one to launch ad hominems without merit, so never fear i won't question your patriotism, I don't see the need to bark at a man I've never met and don't know by name on the internet.

I pray the troops fulfill their mission and return home safely.

One of the reasons Bush had against Saddam to go to War besides the BS WMD crap was he was involved in 9/11!

Saddam WAS NOT INVOLVED WITH 9/11!

There were NO WMD and Saddam was not involved with 9/11.

Bush should have put everything we had to get Bi-Laden...But he didn't and actually let him get away at Tora-Bora when we could have got him.

[zrinkill]

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

And I must add that the Case Closed reference was to a reply he made in a Climate Warming Thread. It was a Joke.

Dont worry buddy .... I got it.

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by zrinkill

Dont worry buddy .... I got it.

I knew you would.

[peplaw06]

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

One of the reasons Bush had against Saddam to go to War besides the BS WMD crap was he was involved in 9/11!

Saddam WAS NOT INVOLVED WITH 9/11!

There were NO WMD and Saddam was not involved with 9/11.

Bush should have put everything we had to get Bi-Laden...But he didn't and actually let him get away at Tora-Bora when we could have got him.

Let him get away, you mean like literally had him in his sights and let him get away? Or just more generally?

[burmafrd]

What happened at Tora Bora ( and I have talked to some Special Forces who were there) is that a significant part of the force used there came from local warlords- and one or more (still not sure) sold out to Osama and let him get away. We tried to do that operation with unreliable local forces and the result came as no suprise.

[Ben_n_austin]

Originally Posted by Mavs Man

I'd relish the possibility of a Bush/Clinton-less White House after 2008, but I think that's highly unlikely.

And then, what happens if Jeb runs after Hillary is through?

What do you mean "if"?

It's going to happen. Jeb is going to run.

[Ben_n_austin]

Originally Posted by Aikbach

I pray the troops fulfill their mission and return home safely.

There is no mission. The mission was to disarm. We've abandoned that mission. You do realize that we're there because of the LIE that took us there.

When the public has figured out the the REASON we went to war was a LIE, I can't figure out why they're not more enraged about the fact that hundreds of thousands of people have died because of this LIE.

I think that some individual people are just more worried about saving face for the party that they're loyal to rather than stand up for something that they know is wrong.

Something just doesn't seem right about this....

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by peplaw06

Let him get away, you mean like literally had him in his sights and let him get away? Or just more generally?

I mean that we had him trapped in Tora-Bora and instead of our troops going after the man that WAS responsible for 9/11 we outsourced the job if you will to local military men and they screwed it up.

There was no way in Hell that Bush should have let Bin-Laden be hunted by local guys when we had a very good fix on him...after all that was the whole reason our military was there...to get Bin-Laden.

It's really unbelievable to this day that Bin-Laden THE MAN that WAS RESPONSIBLE for 9/11 is still walking around but Saddam is dead and you never hear Bush even mention Bin-Laden anymore.

[vta]

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

I mean that we had him trapped in Tora-Bora and instead of our troops going after the man that WAS responsible for 9/11 we outsourced the job if you will to local military men and they screwed it up.

Spoken from the lips of John Kerry. Wording and all. Don't believe everything you here, war is more intricate than that.

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

There was no way in Hell that Bush should have let Bin-Laden be hunted by local guys when we had a very good fix on him...after all that was the whole reason our military was there...to get Bin-Laden.

I hate to have to tell you this, but Bush isn't responsible for for day to day, op to op actions like this. Bureaucratic protocol of the counter-productive nature in the military was instituted long before this goon was in office. Stop following Kerry-isms to the letter, they're a product of hoping the American public is ignorant enough to buy such rhetoric.

That fool would have done no better.

Originally Posted by ConcordCowboy

It's really unbelievable to this day that Bin-Laden THE MAN that WAS RESPONSIBLE for 9/11 is still walking around but Saddam is dead and you never hear Bush even mention Bin-Laden anymore.

Not really. America could have wiped Iran, Saudi Arabia and a few others off the map with a massive swoop of military might and gone a long way toward diminishing terrorism and it's roots, and kept bin Laden alive to ponder life without a base of support and failing kidneys in a cave. At this point killing the jerk would be more symbolic than anything. If he isn't already dead.

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by vta

Don't believe everything you here, war is more intricate than that.

It's what happened and it's the truth.

Intricate? What's so intricate about using the Best military in the world to get the man that caused 9/11 instead of a bunch of locals. After all that was the purpose of our troops being there.

Originally Posted by vta

I hate to have to tell you this, but Bush isn't responsible for for day to day, op to op actions like this. Bureaucratic protocol of the counter-productive nature in the military was instituted long before this goon was in office. Stop following Kerry-isms to the letter, they're a product of hoping the American public is ignorant enough to buy such rhetoric.

That fool would have done no better.

Sorry he's the Commander-In-Chief and he gets briefings and knows what's going on...or at least he should know.

If I knew that locals where going after the man that caused 9/11 instead of my own military I would have made sure that they changed the protocol.

He does have that power.

Originally Posted by vta

Not really. America could have wiped Iran, Saudi Arabia and a few others off the map with a massive swoop of military might and gone a long way toward diminishing terrorism and it's roots, and kept bin Laden alive to ponder life without a base of support and failing kidneys in a cave. At this point killing the jerk would be more symbolic than anything. If he isn't already dead.

Symbolic? This man caused 9/11 and for all we know could be planning another attack...he has to be brought to justice.

[burmafrd]

We actually were pretty light on the ground in Afghanistan. The main problem with operating there is that we have very few bases nearby. No permanent bases closer then Diego Garcia, which is not all that. Logistics support for a large force just is not there. Even now after several years its not all that great, though better then it was. At that time, all our support had to come from either Saudi or Diego Garcia. Chasing Ben Laden was mostly our special forces- which just in case you forgot come in 12 man A Teams. We had some rangers and some Airborne there but not much. We used locals because we HAD TO. That was a big area- we did not have Ben Laden pinpointed to more then that general area. And he had a fair amount of forces protecting him- and it was THEIR ground- their home- which is a big edge. We really had no choice in using locals.

[ConcordCowboy]

Originally Posted by burmafrd

We actually were pretty light on the ground in Afghanistan. The main problem with operating there is that we have very few bases nearby. No permanent bases closer then Diego Garcia, which is not all that. Logistics support for a large force just is not there. Even now after several years its not all that great, though better then it was. At that time, all our support had to come from either Saudi or Diego Garcia. Chasing Ben Laden was mostly our special forces- which just in case you forgot come in 12 man A Teams. We had some rangers and some Airborne there but not much. We used locals because we HAD TO. That was a big area- we did not have Ben Laden pinpointed to more then that general area. And he had a fair amount of forces protecting him- and it was THEIR ground- their home- which is a big edge. We really had no choice in using locals.

Seems to me that they would have known that the Special Forces weren't going to be enough and would have got a bigger force somehow...someway.

Oh well it's done now...Hopefully if he's not dead we will actually get him someday.

But I read that if he's to be captured that he wants his men to Martyr him and themselves.

So getting him alive which would be great is probably a impossible dream.

[burmafrd]

Amateurs talk strategy and tactics; professionals talk logistics and sustainment. There was no way to at that time support a larger force. We were busting a gut to keep going what we had. There were no bases to fly in support in any amount- most of it had to come from the US or Germany, which due to the drawdown there did not have that much. At that time we had very little deployed overseas. The largest force was in Bosnia. We had small forces in a few other places. When we lost Clark AFB and Subic Bay in the Phillipines, we lost a lot of capability to project in that part of the world.
Troops and supplies had to come from the US for most part. And remember this- we had to be thinking of operating there for a long time- so we had to exercise some caution in spreading ourselves too thin, despite how badly we wanted Ben Laden. We probably could have taken more risks and tried to bring in more troops- but hindsight in always 20-20. In all probabilty any failures are more in the command and control sections high up in the Pentagon. Late 2001 we had had more then 10 years of drawdowns, and the political types in the military were the ones getting the promotions. The real fighters and risk takers as usual in a peace time military got the shaft. By the way, for all the things Rumsfeld got wrong, he pushed like crazy for the operations in Afghanistan to start as soon as possible; we knew that Ben Laden would be moving and we had to try for him while we still had a good idea of where he was. Right after Tora Bora he disapeared and it was a year before we had even a half idea where he was. The CIA was particularly helpless, since they had not even tried to place many agents in that part of the world. It was not considered a priority.