Analysts: Military Draft Needed Within Year

[Nbadan]

Bob Dart
Cox News Service
Mar. 30, 2005 03:24 PM


WASHINGTON - If American forces aren't pulling out of Iraq in a year, a draft will be needed to meet manpower requirements, military analysts warned Wednesday.

With recruitment lagging and no end in sight for U.S. forces in Iraq, the "breaking point" for the nation's all-volunteer military will be mid-2006, agreed Lawrence Korb, a draft opponent and assistant defense secretary in the Reagan administration, and Phillip Carter, a conscription advocate and former Army captain.

"America's all-volunteer military simply cannot deploy and sustain enough troops to succeed in places like Iraq while still deterring threats elsewhere in the world," Carter concluded in the March issue of "Washington Monthly." advertisement

Korb is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, and a senior adviser to the Center for Defense Information. Carter is attorney who writes on military affairs for Slate.com and other media. They debated at a symposium on the draft Wednesday.

AZ Central (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0330draft30-ON.html)

Here is a link to the Washington Monthly, The Case for the Draft (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0503.carter.html), in which the authors, including Carter, propose national service with choice of civilian or military, with a lottery somehow involved. Non-compliance will be punished by being refused admittance to college and Universities! Very strange article.

[Nbadan]

Today is a national call to action day for the growing anti-draft movement..


March 31 National call to action.
No Draft, No Way!

On March 31, the Selective Service System (SSS) will report to President Bush that it is ready to implement the draft within 75 days. Right now, the SSS is staffing local draft boards, training volunteer registrars to work on high school and college campuses, and streamlining its induction process. They have also gained access to the Department of Education's computer files, to ensure maximum registration.

It is clear that the Bush Administration is preparing for a draft. They are desperate for new soldiers to continue the occupation of Iraq and to prepare for new wars against Iran, Syria, and elsewhere.

At the same time that Bush is looking to youth to supply cannon fodder for his wars, he is busy cutting financial aid and slashing social programs. The same young people that Bush wants to use to fight his wars are finding it harder to pay for their education, find jobs that pay a living wage, or obtain basic necessities, like health care or affordable housing.

It is time for young people, who are already under attack from the Bush Administration, to take a stand.On March 31, the same day that the Selective Service System is reporting that the draft is ready to go, youth all over the country will report that they will refuse to go.

Local No Draft, No Way organizers and other anti-draft activists are planning protests, walkouts, and direct action at recruiting centers, selective service offices, and other sites. We call upon students, youth, and antiwar activists to organize local actions on March 31 to say "No Draft, No Way!"

No Draft, No Way!! (http://www.nodraftnoway.org/)

[desflood]

A senior fellow for a liberal think tank! There's an unbiased opinion! And they have the gall to accuse conservatives of using scare tactics. :lol
That's all this is, you know. A big scare tactic designed to turn people against the Bush administration. It'll work on some. But those of us with an IQ over 75 will still know better, and scorn you.

[Nbadan]

:rolleyes

That's what you said about the WMD thing, and the Saddam-Al Queda connections thing, and the torture being just-a-few-bad-apples thing, the growing Iraqi insurgency thing from 2000 dead-enders to 20-50,000 insurgents..and on..and on and on...

[Useruser666]

And your still wrong about all of those things Dan! :lol

Dan 6 months ago: "There's going to be a draft in six months!"

Dan 3 months ago: "There's going to be a draft in 6 months!"

Dan 1 month ago: "There's going to be a draft in six months!"

Dan today: "There's going to be a draft in a year!"

At least you are setting your predictions further in the future so you don't have to change them as often.

[3rdCoast]

It wont happen.

[knownalien]

this is no scare tactic. the fact is recruitment numbers are low and retention is low and Bush's wars are many (esp. the ones he dreams of starting). the "axis of evil" knows that unless they see a draft here in the USA they know there won't be invaded. we can barely handle Iraq as it is.

[3rdCoast]

wont happen. isnt the US gonna be pulling out of Iraq soon anyways?

[knownalien]

wont happen. isnt the US gonna be pulling out of Iraq soon anyways?
well, it depends on what you really believe. Since we are there, IMHO, to protect the oil then we are there for some time. Oh, and you should probably know that we have built several permanent bases there.

[desflood]

:rolleyes

That's what you said about the WMD thing, and the Saddam-Al Queda connections thing, and the torture being just-a-few-bad-apples thing, the growing Iraqi insurgency thing from 2000 dead-enders to 20-50,000 insurgents..and on..and on and on...
As I've posted before, there will never be a draft simply for the reason that whomever puts it into effect will be committing political suicide. If there is one thing those people love, it's power. You don't really think they'll knowingly hang themselves on this issue, do you?

[3rdCoast]

No one wants a draft. If Bush allows a draft,then the republicans will not win an election again, becasuse then the republican voters will be pissed as they democrats already are. It doesnt make sense. Bush will just take out the entire country(innocent and all) before he allows a draft.

[desflood]

:rolleyes

That's what you said about the WMD thing, and the Saddam-Al Queda connections thing, and the torture being just-a-few-bad-apples thing, the growing Iraqi insurgency thing from 2000 dead-enders to 20-50,000 insurgents..and on..and on and on...
Bin Laden Al Queda and 9-11 Iraq Connection

Back to Warriors For Truth News

Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, & the 9-11 hijackers received assistance from Iraq.


Bill Clinton declared in Executive Order 13129 of July 4, 1999: I, William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States of America, find that the actions and policies of the Taliban in Afghanistan, in allowing territory under its control in Afghanistan to be used as a safe haven and base of operations for Usama Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda (sic) organization who have committed and threaten to continue to commit acts of violence against the United States and its nationals, constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the U.S., and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

On June 30, 2001 President George W. Bush continued the same Executive Order from Bill Clinton, using nearly identical language in a notice repeated here:

23. On information and belief, Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and the hijackers also received material support and assistance from Iraq, by and through its officials, agents, and/or employees, to carry out terrorist attacks on the United States, including the September 11, 2001 attacks.

[desflood]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=3378&R=798D1B52B

For you, Dan. Pages and pages of intelligence and informational memos PROVING the link between Iraq and AL Queda.

[desflood]

:rolleyes

That's what you said about the WMD thing, and the Saddam-Al Queda connections thing, and the torture being just-a-few-bad-apples thing, the growing Iraqi insurgency thing from 2000 dead-enders to 20-50,000 insurgents..and on..and on and on...
January 05, 2004
Senior Syrian journalist reports Iraq’s WMD located in three Syrian sites
The latest from DEBKAfile about the movement of Iraqi WMDs into Syria:

Nizar Najoef, a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime, said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper "Di Telegraaf," that he knows the three sites where Iraq's WMD are kept. The storage places are:
1. Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles. Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.

2. The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there is a big Syrian airforce camp. Vital parts of Iraq's WMD are stored there.

3. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of the city Homs.

Najoef writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by the commanders of Saddam Hussein's Special Republican Guard, including General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad's cousin. Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad family.

In February 2003, a month before America's invasion in Iraq, DEBKAfile and DEBKA-Net-Weekly were the only media to report the movement of Iraqi WMD, the efforts to bring them from Iraq to Syria, and the personal involvement of Bashar Assad and his family in the operation.

Najoef, who has won prizes for journalistic integrity, says he wrote his letter because he has terminal cancer.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I love this, Dan comes along every other month citing some liberal whackjob as saying there's going to be a draft, and it never comes.

There's only two relevant matters on this:

1. The Iraqis are moving forward with their future, and even the Sunnis are working with the Shiites and Kurds. In short, it's only a matter of time before we begin rotating more troops home and sending less back.

2. Whichever party controlling Congress and the White House at the time of the draft will never have another candidate elected. EVER. In short, it won't happen.

[Clandestino]

will you be drafted dan?

[knownalien]

I love this, Dan comes along every other month citing some liberal whackjob as saying there's going to be a draft, and it never comes.

There's only two relevant matters on this:

1. The Iraqis are moving forward with their future, and even the Sunnis are working with the Shiites and Kurds. In short, it's only a matter of time before we begin rotating more troops home and sending less back.

2. Whichever party controlling Congress and the White House at the time of the draft will never have another candidate elected. EVER. In short, it won't happen.
what you say holds true ONLY if we do not enter into any more wars.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

So what, pray tell, do you want us to do should say NK go into SK, or China go into Taiwan?

Run away? Your statement only holds true if the US is acting pre-emptively. If someone attacks our ass, we probably still won't need a draft because just like after 9/11 people would be lining up to go kick someone's ass.

[knownalien]

So what, pray tell, do you want us to do should say NK go into SK, or China go into Taiwan?
the difference here is that in such a situation the USA wouldn't have to go in that ALONE. There would be no false claims made to the UN. The whole world would witness the invasion and likely line up to help out. BUT, you are talking super powers now. The USA alone couldn't stand up to NK, and SK(our friends Aggie. . , but whatever), or esp. China. We have been pampered into thinking our DU weaponry can defeat any enemy. It is false.



Run away? Your statement only holds true if the US is acting pre-emptively. If someone attacks our ass, we probably still won't need a draft because just like after 9/11 people would be lining up to go kick someone's ass.
well, who is supposed to attack us and how? If any other "terrorist" group does something to our country, where in the hell do we invade?? I'll answer your question: doesn't matter. We'll use anther attack on our soil to take away even more rights of the USA citizens AND we'll just invade the next big oil deposit. Right now Iran is the most likely scenario. Trouble is, that won't be a pushover like Iraq was. Most people don't "really" know how we defeated Sadamm.

[Guru of Nothing]

will you be drafted dan?

[jack handey] Wouldn't it sweet if Dan was drafted. Then he could tell everyone, "See, I told you!"[/jack handey]

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Where did I say anything about SK? Just said it'd be NK invading them.

As for the next attack, it will be Syria. Our special forces will covertly deal with Iran, but we won't invade, we'll topple it from within.

Syria on the other hand, with their links to Saddam (and probable hiding space of his military goodies), not to mention their allowing attacks to come into Iraq from their land, deserve whatever ass whipping we could and would put on them.

[Nbadan]

1. The Iraqis are moving forward with their future, and even the Sunnis are working with the Shiites and Kurds. In short, it's only a matter of time before we begin rotating more troops home and sending less back.

The Shiites and Kurds can't even agree amongst themselves on the breakdown of their government much less to what degree there should be Sunni involvement. We are three months removed from the election and Iraq still has no President and Prime Minister. Turns out this democracy stuff is alot tougher implement than anyone thought. Iraq continues to be a dangerous place for civilians, and has become a breeding ground for international terrorists.

Let's not even talk about those 12 permenant bases that the U.S. is building in Iraq. We may eventually lebanonize Iraq, pull our troops behind fort-type structures for their protection, but we aren't leaving anytime soon.

[Clandestino]

The Shiites and Kurds can't even agree amongst themselves on the breakdown of their government much less to what degree there should be Sunni involvement. We are three months removed from the election and Iraq still has no President and Prime Minister. Turns out this democracy stuff is alot tougher implement than anyone thought. Iraq continues to be a dangerous place for civilians, and has become a breeding ground for international terrorists.

Let's not even talk about those 12 permenant bases that the U.S. is building in Iraq. We may eventually lebanonize Iraq, pull our troops behind fort-type structures for their protection, but we aren't leaving anytime soon.

nobody ever said a democracy was an easy thing... look at how long other countries have taken to have stable democracies...

and it took us 10 years to leave bosnia, it will take a long time to leave iraq too... the international community needs to step up.

[knownalien]

Where did I say anything about SK? Just said it'd be NK invading them.


my bad. sorry.

[knownalien]

The Shiites and Kurds can't even agree amongst themselves on the breakdown of their government much less to what degree there should be Sunni involvement. We are three months removed from the election and Iraq still has no President and Prime Minister. Turns out this democracy stuff is alot tougher implement than anyone thought. Iraq continues to be a dangerous place for civilians, and has become a breeding ground for international terrorists.

Let's not even talk about those 12 permenant bases that the U.S. is building in Iraq. We may eventually lebanonize Iraq, pull our troops behind fort-type structures for their protection, but we aren't leaving anytime soon.
not only this, but whole religious groups boycotted the election!! and their "election" was just as stinky as our last one. I think it's awesome when we can put a CIA operative in power and then have an election for him . . . like we really wanted "democracy" to win out over there. Look, everyone was running on a platform of getting us out!! That's the first damn time half of America and all of Iraq have agreed! Let Halliburton defend their own arses over there alone!

[mookie2001]

yeah and monkeys might fly out of my ass

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The Shiites and Kurds can't even agree amongst themselves on the breakdown of their government much less to what degree there should be Sunni involvement.

:lol Our politicians can't even agree on how to run *our* country, and you're expecting some people who are trying it for the first time in 30 years to have it all squared away with a snap of their fingers.

It's called politics, and deal making, Dan, they'll get it all figured out over there (much to your chagrin).

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

By the way Dan, here's yet another sign the Sunnis are coming around...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/04/01/iraq.main/index.html

What are you going to have to say when they all join up and kick Zarqawi's ass eight ways from Sunday, along with all his little dipshit followers?

Things in Iraq are improving, I know it sucks to read that for people like Dan who are rooting for complete failure by anyone even remotely siding with Bush.

[Extra Stout]

Poor Dan, having to root against progress and freedom in order for his side to look good. Oh, please please please don't let Iraq become a successful state!

Here's a tip, Dan -- do like the Europeans are doing -- as Arab states moderate over the next several years, insist that it would have happened anyway, and that American intervention only delayed it. That worked for the fall of communism, too.

But it's good to see that as the old Left (e.g., Dan) is fading into irrelevance like the Whigs did in the 1850's, what with communism dead, socialism proven ineffective, and their own moral imperative undermined by their fixation on amorality, religious "conservatives" are morphing into big-government bleeding-heart liberals to take their place. Gotta have two parties, after all. It doesn't work when your ideology consists of nothing more than:
1) Hating your country and hoping it fails in everything it does
2) Promoting a society whose chief value is unlimited consequence-free recreational sex

[mookie2001]

yeah everyone whos not republican just wants to see americans killed and iraq become a mecca for terrorism
john kerry would join them if he wasnt so old
those bastards
i wish we could send some tahoes over there
those iraqis wallk around places

[mookie2001]

yukons and suburbans would be ok too
only a democrat wouldnt do it
escalades would be a waste of money

[Nbadan]

not only this, but whole religious groups boycotted the election!! and their "election" was just as stinky as our last one.

Not really. The right side won the Iraqi election, but it wasn't the side the W.H. wanted since among the platform the Shiites ran on was to get the U.S. out of Iraq ASAP. That's why we have all these 'negotiations' going on about the eventual breakdown of the government. Allawi is there to stay one way or the other.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

the platform the Shiites ran on was to get the U.S. out of Iraq ASAP.

Do you realize how fucking stupid you sound? BUSH wants to get the US out of Iraq ASAP, let alone the Shi'ites.

[Nbadan]

Do you realize how fucking stupid you sound? BUSH wants to get the US out of Iraq ASAP, let alone the Shi'ites.

Then get them out. What the Fuck are they still doing there? If the Iraqi government doesn't have the backing of the Iraqi people then it doesn't deserve to exist - its called self determination. Look it up.

[Nbadan]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/tuvor/around.gif

[Useruser666]

Then get them out. What the Fuck are they still doing there? If the Iraqi government doesn't have the backing of the Iraqi people then it doesn't deserve to exist - its called self determination. Look it up.

Yeah, then all that was sacrificed will be for nothing if it fails. Good call. You have the same goals as the terrorists Dan. See any semblance of order and a the formation of a peaceful government fail.

[mookie2001]

Nbadan dropped the knowledge
hey at least gas prices have dropped since the war in iraq
and the country is safer
wait...

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Then get them out. What the Fuck are they still doing there?

Waiting for the Iraqi government to get set up and going, so that when we do leave Zarqawi and Saddam's Ba'athist bastards don't throw the country into civil war and undo everything we did there and everything our troops fought for.

Of course, the success of a new Iraq means that you fail Dan, so I could see why you'd want us to get out before the job is done.

We've got a Republican president who is committed to finishing the job, not running around half-assed with tomahawk diplomacy (and failing miserably at it) like Clitton.

[3rdCoast]

funny, a lot of people like to talk shit about bush but what are you, personally going to do Dan? Stop whining and just deal with it. No one wants our troops over there to die. Just chill man.

[MannyIsGod]

We've got a Republican president who is committed to finishing the job, not running around half-assed with tomahawk diplomacy (and failing miserably at it) like Clitton.

If you want your opinion to be regarded any higher than Dan's perhaps you should stop the same type of rhetoric he spews.

Tell me one time Clinton would have had the same type of congressional support Bush saw after 9/11 and I'll show you a time where Clinton would have had the same kind of reaction.

[JoeChalupa]

If there is a draft I won't be involved.

Damn. There's the old "Clinton" theory again. :rolleyes

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Tell me one time Clinton would have had the same type of congressional support Bush saw after 9/11 and I'll show you a time where Clinton would have had the same kind of reaction.

The one time Clinton had the mandate from Congress to do something to make our contry more secure, he fired a few tomahawks into suspected "chemical plants."

Color me unimpressed.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

The one time Clinton had the mandate from Congress to do something to make our contry more secure, he fired a few tomahawks into suspected "chemical plants."

Color me unimpressed.

So you are more impressed by Bush who took us to war over suspected "WMD"? Color me very unimpressed.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I forgot, we should sit back until someone kills a lot of Americans, then it's okay to fight.

My bad.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Clinton wasn't sitting back doing nothing and you know it.
But you don't rush into war with faulty intelligence and with Dubya you're starting with faulty intelligence.
The blame Clinton for everything only goes so far.
Get over it.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Seriously, what he do then? Faulty intelligence? Clinton blew up a medicine factory when he thought he was going to be nailing Osama :lol


The blame Clinton for everything only goes so far.

Well, you and Dan blame Bush for everything, turnabout's fair play.

[MannyIsGod]

AHF, what I want to know is if you honestly believe Congress would have ever let Clinton attack Afghanistan the way Bush did?

[desflood]

Clinton wasn't sitting back doing nothing and you know it.
But you don't rush into war with faulty intelligence and with Dubya you're starting with faulty intelligence.

The blame Clinton for everything only goes so far.
Get over it.
Syria had Osama Bin Laden in their hands some years ago. They called Bill Clinton and said, "We have Osama. Do you want him?" And the great President Clinton said, "NO." So, there's a lot we don't blame on Clinton, but there are some things he should take the rap for.

[MannyIsGod]

Des, I'd suggest you do some research about what you just said, then come back and edit your post.

#1 You got the country wrong.
#2 You got what happend wrong.

[desflood]

Well then I apologise. Grab a link for me and I'll do some research.

[desflood]

Okay, it was Sudan, but I stand by the rest of my statement.

Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize
Sudan offered up the terrorist and data on his network. The then-president and his advisors didn't respond.



By MANSOOR IJAZ
President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.
I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.

The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.
As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.

Realizing the growing problem with Bin Laden, Bashir sent key intelligence officials to the U.S. in February 1996.

The Sudanese offered to arrest Bin Laden and extradite him to Saudi Arabia or, barring that, to "baby-sit" him--monitoring all his activities and associates.

But Saudi officials didn't want their home-grown terrorist back where he might plot to overthrow them.

In May 1996, the Sudanese capitulated to U.S. pressure and asked Bin Laden to leave, despite their feeling that he could be monitored better in Sudan than elsewhere.

Bin Laden left for Afghanistan, taking with him Ayman Zawahiri, considered by the U.S. to be the chief planner of the Sept. 11 attacks; Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, who traveled frequently to Germany to obtain electronic equipment for Al Qaeda; Wadih El-Hage, Bin Laden's personal secretary and roving emissary, now serving a life sentence in the U.S. for his role in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya; and Fazul Abdullah Mohammed and Saif Adel, also accused of carrying out the embassy attacks.

Some of these men are now among the FBI's 22 most-wanted terrorists.

The two men who allegedly piloted the planes into the twin towers, Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, prayed in the same Hamburg mosque as did Salim and Mamoun Darkazanli, a Syrian trader who managed Salim's bank accounts and whose assets are frozen.

Important data on each had been compiled by the Sudanese.

But U.S. authorities repeatedly turned the data away, first in February 1996; then again that August, when at my suggestion Sudan's religious ideologue, Hassan Turabi, wrote directly to Clinton; then again in April 1997, when I persuaded Bashir to invite the FBI to come to Sudan and view the data; and finally in February 1998, when Sudan's intelligence chief, Gutbi al-Mahdi, wrote directly to the FBI.
Gutbi had shown me some of Sudan's data during a three-hour meeting in Khartoum in October 1996. When I returned to Washington, I told Berger and his specialist for East Africa, Susan Rice, about the data available. They said they'd get back to me. They never did. Neither did they respond when Bashir made the offer directly. I believe they never had any intention to engage Muslim countries--ally or not. Radical Islam, for the administration, was a convenient national security threat.

And that was not the end of it. In July 2000--three months before the deadly attack on the destroyer Cole in Yemen--I brought the White House another plausible offer to deal with Bin Laden, by then known to be involved in the embassy bombings. A senior counter-terrorism official from one of the United States' closest Arab allies--an ally whose name I am not free to divulge--approached me with the proposal after telling me he was fed up with the antics and arrogance of U.S. counter-terrorism officials.

The offer, which would have brought Bin Laden to the Arab country as the first step of an extradition process that would eventually deliver him to the U.S., required only that Clinton make a state visit there to personally request Bin Laden's extradition. But senior Clinton officials sabotaged the offer, letting it get caught up in internal politics within the ruling family--Clintonian diplomacy at its best.
Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history.

[mookie2001]

desflood
have you even heard any recent news at all about bin laden
it seems that the search for him, has been somewhat..., abandoned
bush made a promise to catch that fucker
i hope he does,
he's always got an excuse that he's fighting terrorism in iraq
and searching for wmds
and liberating them
and setting up a foothold of democracy in the middle east
are people that dumb that theyd take
---liberating the people of iraq, who a large number, dont want to be liberated, and whos strict adherance to their religion makes it nearly impossible for them to be free, and to set up a "foothold of democracy", finding out for sure they have no wmds, and killing MORE than 100,000 innocent people and the deaths of thousand of americans
---i'm sure a VAST majority would trade all that crap for 1 osama

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Manny - Afghanistan proper? No.

Grab and go of Osama and his leadership clan, hell yes.

[Nbadan]

President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

Capture Osama for what and from what? At the time Sudan was willing to 'turn Osama over to the Saudi's' he wasn't yet connected with the African embassy bombings nor any other act of international terrorism. Hell, Osama was on the CIA payroll till as late as 1991.

The Sudanese never offered to turn Osama over to the U.S., nor was Osama wanted by the U.N., but Osama was wanted in Saudi Arabia for sedition.

[Nbadan]

The two men who allegedly piloted the planes into the twin towers, Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi, prayed in the same Hamburg mosque as did Salim and Mamoun Darkazanli, a Syrian trader who managed Salim's bank accounts and whose assets are frozen.

Important data on each had been compiled by the Sudanese.

But U.S. authorities repeatedly turned the data away, first in February 1996; then again that August, when at my suggestion Sudan's religious ideologue, Hassan Turabi, wrote directly to Clinton; then again in April 1997, when I persuaded Bashir to invite the FBI to come to Sudan and view the data; and finally in February 1998, when Sudan's intelligence chief, Gutbi al-Mahdi, wrote directly to the FBI.

Actually, Muhammed Atta was being trailed by the FBI up until he left the country around 2000(?) and returned in early 2001 for preparations for the 911 attacks and living the high life with his adult dancer girlfriend in Private Clubs where Atta and his co-conspirators would drink beer like Westerners and brag about attacking the WTT to dancers and Club Managers. German authorities had the Hamburg cell covered like stink on shit. This is why, despite not having anything resembling the Patriot Act, the Germans have captured more actual Al-Queda suspects than the U.S..

[desflood]

Capture Osama for what and from what? At the time Sudan was willing to 'turn Osama over to the Saudi's' he wasn't yet connected with the African embassy bombings nor any other act of international terrorism. Hell, Osama was on the CIA payroll till as late as 1991.

The Sudanese never offered to turn Osama over to the U.S., nor was Osama wanted by the U.N., but Osama was wanted in Saudi Arabia for sedition.
"For what?" Go back to the article. In 2000, when they had their last chance, he was known to have been involved in the embassy bombings.

[MannyIsGod]

Manny - Afghanistan proper? No.

Grab and go of Osama and his leadership clan, hell yes.

And you think it was militarily possible to do #2 without doing #1?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Special Forces do all kinds of grab and go missions without a full military invasion all the time.

[MannyIsGod]

And the infrastructore would have been the same! We can't find the man now, what makes you think it was possible then?

Look, I'm not a big fan of Clinton at all, but this is ridiculous.

[Nbadan]

"For what?" Go back to the article. In 2000, when they had their last chance, he was known to have been involved in the embassy bombings.

The Feds were never even interested in Usama until 1996 and even then it was just an investigation, not an indictment


The U.S. State Department issues a dossier on bin Laden that claims he is a financier of radical Islamic causes and connects him to the 1992 hotel bombing in Aden, Yemen and the training of the Somalis who attacked U.S. troops in Mogadishu. At the same time, a grand jury investigation of Osama bin Laden is initiated in New York.

Source:PBS.org (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/etc/cron.html)

But it wasn't till June 8th 1998 that a U.S. grand jury issues an indictment of Bin Laden..


A U.S. grand jury issues a sealed indictment charging bin Laden with conspiracy to attack “defense utilities of the United States.” The indictment alleges bin Laden is involved in the October 1993 attack on U.S. soldiers in Somalia.

Source:PBS.org (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/etc/cron.html)

Unfortunately for the U.S., Bin Laden had fled Sudan under U.S. pressure in May 1996..


Under international pressure, Sudan expels bin Laden. He and his followers return to Afghanistan.

Source:PBS.org (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/etc/cron.html)

Needless to say, After Bin Laden fled Sudan in 1996, the Afghanis under the Taliban never offered to turn Bin Laden over to the U.S. for any price.