Apparently the "Wanted Dead or Alive" posters weren't as effective as planned.
E |
09.13.03 - 4:38 pm | #
The only way we'll get Osama bin Missing is by winning hearts and minds, but that's really hard when you keep killing people.
NTodd |
Homepage |
09.13.03 - 4:43 pm | #
If someone is bringing up Osama bin Forgotten, it must be time for another diversonary bad guy. Who shall we pick on this time?
pie |
09.13.03 - 5:01 pm | #
``Who shall we pick on this time?''
The Flavor of the Month appears to be Iran.
secularhuman |
09.13.03 - 5:07 pm | #
W's motto is: out of sight, out of mind. Osama can't coordinate any terrorist activities because he's burrowed in a hole somewhere. Saddam is in the same boat. The latest absurdity is that Saddam himself was the WMD. He's out of power now, so he can no longer produce any WMDs, or distribute them willy-nilly to any terrorist who wants one.
TownDrunk |
09.13.03 - 5:07 pm | #
>>``Who shall we pick on this time?''
What happened to the reports that the real cause of the "US troop shortage" problem is the fact that Rum-owitz is keeping a significant fighting force in our back pocket for Korea?
Does anybody know the realities of our troop strength? The SCLM is currently meme-happy with the notion that we "don't have any to spare." But Rummy is under such hot lights now that he'd send his mother abroad if it'd make things better.
Is Iraq in the tank because Bushco is anticipating a "third front"? Or--tinfoil hats in operational position--Rove is going to see to it there's a third front?
Telescope |
09.13.03 - 5:18 pm | #
But Rummy is under such hot lights now that he'd send his mother abroad if it'd make things better.
Funny.
Do you think the top brass would sit still for another screw-up somewhere else?
pie |
09.13.03 - 5:29 pm | #
Bin Laden may be the Castro of Central Asia.
Shag from Brookline |
09.13.03 - 5:43 pm | #
I wonder if Rummy was searching the crowd of soldiers to see who was or wasn't showing the proper amount of enthusiasm.
No promotion for you!
pie |
09.13.03 - 5:57 pm | #
let's go after someone we kin ketch
mike in pr |
09.13.03 - 6:02 pm | #
Does anybody know the realities of our troop strength?
The Australian had some info about that (by way of GlobalSecurity.org):
Washington now has military forces in about 130 countries, fighting in some of them, peacekeeping and training foreign military units in others. You can hear George Washington turning in his grave.
...
Using official statistics, the editors at Global Security report there are 155 combat battalions in the US army. Before October 2001, only 17 of those were deployed on active combat service, in Kosovo and a few other hotspots (garrison deployment in Germany and Japan is not regarded as "active combat" service). Today, that figure stands at 98 combat battalions deployed in active areas.
Even a non-military expert can see this is an impossibly high number to sustain over the longer term, which is why, in addition to the 255,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guard forces deployed in combat and peacekeeping missions abroad, the US has sent another 136,000 troops from the National Guard and Reserves.
NTodd |
Homepage |
09.13.03 - 6:32 pm | #
The Flavor of the Month appears to be Iran.
And, worse still, our fears there may be justified. Iran seems to have learned the Bloody Damn Flippin Obvious Lesson of Iraq, which is that if you're in the Axis of Evil and don't want the U.S. invade you, you'd better actually get nuclear weapons, and damn quick.
The evidence is worrysome that they are, indeed, actively developing such weapons. And from a logical point of view, it's hard to blame them.
And -- tying this comment back to Bin Laden, so it's not so off-topic after all -- there are more elements inside Iran that are friendly to Al Queda than there ever were in Iraq. Not that I seriously think any country would ever give Bin Laden something as expensive and difficult-to-produce as an actual nuclear weapon. But it is... worrisome...
Hunter |
09.13.03 - 6:44 pm | #
Does anybody know the realities of our troop strength?
A recent GAO study says that the current level of troops in Iraq cannot be maintained past next March, if normal rotation procedure is followed. Either the normal rotation must be altered(or abandoned), or the troop level must be drastically reduced, by about 50%. Immediately after this study was publicized, the Bushies got serious about getting UN help. Nothing like negotiating from strength. Is there anything these assholes CAN'T fuck up?
The simple answer is obviously, no. shrub is not held accountable, so far, for anything.
But I have this feeling some of those birds are coming home to roost in a very Hitchcockian sense.
I'm sure some deity somewhere is looking for a nice big eagle to pluck at the boy emperor's liver.
ice weasel |
09.13.03 - 7:16 pm | #
Imagine the relief with which our beloved adminstration looks up on the month-after-month putrid employment numbers. Certainly will take pressure off armed forces retention efforts.
Boris Presley |
09.13.03 - 7:34 pm | #
Come on. Even the dumb ones know, that Saddam, not Osama, was the perpetrator of 9/11. Why go after Osama, then? Coulter said so. Must be the truth. Coulter never lies.
Jonas M Luster |
Homepage |
09.13.03 - 10:55 pm | #
Damn, you mean Iatollah Homeinni is dead?!? shit.
pansypoo |
Homepage |
09.13.03 - 11:20 pm | #
One blogger, we forget who right now, has renamed him Osama bin Forgotten.
TalkLeft |
Homepage |
09.14.03 - 5:02 pm | #