Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2008-11-18 06:06:21)
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.deeznutz1245 wrote:
says you Brad. There are many things that go bump in the night we arent aware of.
Yep, the US created this situation. ObviouslyBraddock wrote:
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.deeznutz1245 wrote:
says you Brad. There are many things that go bump in the night we arent aware of.
Created what exactly?Pug wrote:
Yep, the US created this situation. ObviouslyBraddock wrote:
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.deeznutz1245 wrote:
says you Brad. There are many things that go bump in the night we arent aware of.
Coincidently enough, some of those jobs just happen to be forward deployed clandestine operatives gathering intelligence as well as eliminating imminent threats.Braddock wrote:
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.deeznutz1245 wrote:
says you Brad. There are many things that go bump in the night we arent aware of.
Imminent threats from where? Mexico? Canada?deeznutz1245 wrote:
Coincidently enough, some of those jobs just happen to be forward deployed clandestine operatives gathering intelligence as well as eliminating imminent threats.Braddock wrote:
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.deeznutz1245 wrote:
says you Brad. There are many things that go bump in the night we arent aware of.
Aren't you saying that its our fault?Braddock wrote:
Created what exactly?Pug wrote:
Yep, the US created this situation. ObviouslyBraddock wrote:
Things that people doing their job properly will take take of.
Last edited by Pug (2008-11-18 06:28:28)
No. Where did I say that? The US was attacked by a band of Saudi terrorists, they may have been trained and schooled throughout the Middle East but their attack took place in US airspace and they passed through domestic security in order to carry it out. To jump from this actual scenario to the hypothesis that active warfare in countries half the world away is the way to prevent similar future occurences instead of merely beefing up the flabby and complacent domestic security procedures that allowed the terrorists through in the first place is where the huge error has been made... and it has needlessly cost the lives of many, many young men and women.Pug wrote:
Aren't you saying that its our fault?Braddock wrote:
Created what exactly?Pug wrote:
Yep, the US created this situation. Obviously
No. Less active outside your own borders and had better security at home.Pug wrote:
Ahh, so if we would have been more active outside our borders AND had better security...
deja vu...didn't we discuss this earlier this month already?
Easier said than done Brad. Have you ever worked in the counter intelligence field? No, well I have. I can tell you that Billy Boy's (Clinton) decision make it unlawful for our clandestine operatives to utilize people with criminal backgrounds was a little bit of a setback. Furthermore any intel that was gathered in the past by people with criminal history was to be destroyed in acordance with his appeasment law.Braddock wrote:
Furthermore if US intelligence had been more efficient in tracking the movement of foreign nationals within the US (particularly those from countries known for anti-US extremism) then they would never have even got .......
The same report written and put on the "To Do List" by the Clinton Administration? The one with the 6'5" Arab on dialisis saying he vowed to attack America and then later blew a big fucking hole in the side of the USS Cole? That report? Oh ok just checking.Braddock wrote:
furthermore if George W. Bush had decided to actually read the report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." and acted
Exactly, it's our fault.Braddock wrote:
No. Less active outside your own borders and had better security at home.Pug wrote:
Ahh, so if we would have been more active outside our borders AND had better security...
deja vu...didn't we discuss this earlier this month already?
It's quite simple really Pug, if your airline security had checked to see if those guys had knives, fake bombs and dangerous implements they would not have got on the planes and 9/11 would just be another random date on the calendar. Furthermore if US intelligence had been more efficient in tracking the movement of foreign nationals within the US (particularly those from countries known for anti-US extremism) then they would never have even got near an airport, much less a plane. Further furthermore if George W. Bush had decided to actually read the report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." and acted on the information contained within the whole operation might never have got near fruition.
Invading Iraq, and even Afghanistan, has done nothing in material terms to effect US domestic security.
I know it's not easy but all the money being pumped into Iraq could be better served in this particular sector.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Easier said than done Brad. Have you ever worked in the counter intelligence field? No, well I have. I can tell you that Billy Boy's (Clinton) decision make it unlawful for our clandestine operatives to utilize people with criminal backgrounds was a little bit of a setback. Furthermore any intel that was gathered in the past by people with criminal history was to be destroyed in acordance with his appeasment law.Braddock wrote:
Furthermore if US intelligence had been more efficient in tracking the movement of foreign nationals within the US (particularly those from countries known for anti-US extremism) then they would never have even got .......
Hey I'm not putting forward a red or blue argument here... Clinton had his eye off the ball too, no argument there, but these wars in the Middle East are not helping anything. The idea of wiping out extremism at the source is just not feasible, it's not a wasp nest. For every young man you kill on the battlefields another two or three will volunteer to take his place... the very fact that you were in his country as an occupying force will only serve to validate this decision in the eyes of these young extremists. You have to look after your own patch and deal with other nations' territory on a covert and co-operative basis.deeznutz1245 wrote:
The same report written and put on the "To Do List" by the Clinton Administration? The one with the 6'5" Arab on dialisis saying he vowed to attack America and then later blew a big fucking hole in the side of the USS Cole? That report? Oh ok just checking.Braddock wrote:
furthermore if George W. Bush had decided to actually read the report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." and acted
What's your fault? You keep saying that.Pug wrote:
Exactly, it's our fault.Braddock wrote:
No. Less active outside your own borders and had better security at home.Pug wrote:
Ahh, so if we would have been more active outside our borders AND had better security...
deja vu...didn't we discuss this earlier this month already?
It's quite simple really Pug, if your airline security had checked to see if those guys had knives, fake bombs and dangerous implements they would not have got on the planes and 9/11 would just be another random date on the calendar. Furthermore if US intelligence had been more efficient in tracking the movement of foreign nationals within the US (particularly those from countries known for anti-US extremism) then they would never have even got near an airport, much less a plane. Further furthermore if George W. Bush had decided to actually read the report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." and acted on the information contained within the whole operation might never have got near fruition.
Invading Iraq, and even Afghanistan, has done nothing in material terms to effect US domestic security.
If our security hadn't failed...Braddock wrote:
What's your fault? You keep saying that.Pug wrote:
Exactly, it's our fault.Braddock wrote:
No. Less active outside your own borders and had better security at home.
It's quite simple really Pug, if your airline security had checked to see if those guys had knives, fake bombs and dangerous implements they would not have got on the planes and 9/11 would just be another random date on the calendar. Furthermore if US intelligence had been more efficient in tracking the movement of foreign nationals within the US (particularly those from countries known for anti-US extremism) then they would never have even got near an airport, much less a plane. Further furthermore if George W. Bush had decided to actually read the report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." and acted on the information contained within the whole operation might never have got near fruition.
Invading Iraq, and even Afghanistan, has done nothing in material terms to effect US domestic security.
Well yes, it was the domestic security services who were at fault in their sloppiness but it was very much the Saudi extremists who were to blame for the attacks. Secondly these people weren't 1000's of miles away from you, they were inside the US traveling freely on domestic flights.Pug wrote:
If our security hadn't failed...Braddock wrote:
What's your fault? You keep saying that.
If our intelligence hadn't failed...
If our President hadn't failed...
You don't like people agreeing with you?
Like I said before when you brought this up - unfortunately the US was asleep and something like this HAD to happen to make changes. Because, as you've pointed out several times in other threads, prior to 9/11 we believe people 1000s of miles away are no threat to the US.
The US has made the wrong changes though. Hopefully Obama will rectify this though.Pug wrote:
You're arguing with hindsight. The US hadn't had any security issues prior to the degree 9/11 was...Europe has. Do you think all of the security procedures in Europe existed BEFORE any terrorist acts occurred?
What happened was a tragedy but should not have been used to give carte blanche to cavalier and ultimately self-defeating foreign policy measures.Pug wrote:
So I think your argument is true, but illogical because the US isn't going to make security changes without realizing there was an actual threat. So it happened.
And this is why I think you are a crazy man.Braddock wrote:
Well yes, it was the domestic security services who were at fault in their sloppiness but it was very much the Saudi extremists who were to blame for the attacks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Ladin_ … rike_in_USPug wrote:
You're arguing with hindsight. The US hadn't had any security issues prior to the degree 9/11 was...Europe has. Do you think all of the security procedures in Europe existed BEFORE any terrorist acts occurred?
In light of the forewarnings and pathetic attempts at air defense, you were pretty fucking stupid.Pug wrote:
And this is why I think you are a crazy man.Braddock wrote:
Well yes, it was the domestic security services who were at fault in their sloppiness but it was very much the Saudi extremists who were to blame for the attacks.
Obviously we deserved it because it's our fault.
Last edited by Uzique (2008-11-18 08:03:50)
That's a horrible thing to say Pug, the innocent people who died in those towers and in those planes did not deserve any of what happened on that tragic day and quite frankly I'm shocked that you would even suggest such a thing.Pug wrote:
And this is why I think you are a crazy man.Braddock wrote:
Well yes, it was the domestic security services who were at fault in their sloppiness but it was very much the Saudi extremists who were to blame for the attacks.
Obviously we deserved it because it's our fault.
Yep, that's exactly what I said.Braddock wrote:
That's a horrible thing to say Pug, the innocent people who died in those towers and in those planes did not deserve any of what happened on that tragic day and quite frankly I'm shocked that you would even suggest such a thing.Pug wrote:
And this is why I think you are a crazy man.Braddock wrote:
Well yes, it was the domestic security services who were at fault in their sloppiness but it was very much the Saudi extremists who were to blame for the attacks.
Obviously we deserved it because it's our fault.
Do you have special needs or something? You really can't grasp the argument can you... no one has said the victims of 9/11 deserved what happened... no one. Here's two important definitions for you to mull over:Pug wrote:
Yep, that's exactly what I said.Braddock wrote:
That's a horrible thing to say Pug, the innocent people who died in those towers and in those planes did not deserve any of what happened on that tragic day and quite frankly I'm shocked that you would even suggest such a thing.Pug wrote:
And this is why I think you are a crazy man.
Obviously we deserved it because it's our fault.
You are shocked? It's your fucking argument.