Originally posted by JaTo:

I disagree. One can't correctly plan for reconstruction for ANYTHING until the damage of war has been done.



That's a cop out. They definitely could've planned better than what has been done as far as policing, protecting, and planning on where the funds would come from. Knowing the economic state of Iraq I refuse to believe that bush couldn't have known and planned better for the rebuilding process.

Originally posted by JaTo:


The reason UN support matters now is that we've gone in and done the "dirty work" for them; we did what the UN said they would do through resolution upon resolution.



I don't believe they had a chance to enforce their resolutions and I mean the one that got the inspectors in Iraq before we told them to leave and took over. So we can't say they didn't do their job, cause we cut them off.

Originally posted by JaTo:

THIS is why they have an obligation to get involved. They've cleaned up countless messes beforehand without hardly a posture or whine; yet, when it comes to the US, they pout and rail (oops, I mean FRANCE and the Russian Federation under the auspices of the UN do so)...




I seem to have missed the part where they said if you cut us off and don't let us finish the job you pressured us to start we'll come in and clean up the mess you made. I see why they don't want anything to do with it.

Originally posted by JaTo:
I'll not let you get out of this one. You asked for a political entity tied to terrorism;



No I didn't. I was making the point that there isn't one. Which means that by attacking a nation suspected of being tied to a terrorist organization is really hypocritical since there are so many nations tied to and supporting terrorism.

Originally posted by JaTo:

As for your question, yes we have crippled a not insignificant portion of their infrastructure and funding via a number of operations inside and outside of Afghanistan. Recruiting? No clue, as that's difficult by any standards to track.




Crippled? lol. Ok. Keep believing that. Unless you meant adding fuel to the fire. I guess what Israel is doing with middle east crisis is working too huh. ...Sorry wrong discussion. If you were honest with yourself it's not hard to infer that they believe this is a holy war and the Islamic sentiment that was half way positive towards the US immediately after 9/11 has changed tides.

Originally posted by JaTo:

It's easy to see. EVERY day that goes by in this country that doesn't see a terrorist attack is yet another day that our policies are working and some of the target has been passed on from our civilians to those that serve in Afghanistan and Iraq.



So the US soldiers as martyrs to the administrations policy is accpetable to you?

Originally posted by JaTo:

How do you expect the US to IMMEDIATELY account for WMDs when Iraq didn't account for them in the first place?
Time will tell.




It's not that I expect us to account for them right away. But I do expect that all of the evidence the administration had that Iraq was massing wmds before we went to war would be able to be proven much sooner. I don't know...but it seems it should be taking so long since the UN inspectors covered a lot anyway, but not everything. And if they're that well hidden to me that seems they wouldn't have been so easy to use.

And if we cannot account for something, anything, related to the TONS of wmds they're suspected of having, then it's a no win situation for Bush cause either they didn't have them which makes the reasons for going to war invalid, or they gave them to someone else which means the supposed threat is still the same and we screwed up by letting it get away.

Again. All I'm saying is that the adminstration could've done a much better job first off by letting the inspectors finish their job, and then by preparing for post war Iraq better than it was. But I have a hard time beleiving much effort and planning went into post war Iraq, even though this was Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Time will tell.


'03 Saab 9-5 Aero