jraeyre wrote:
I said, way back in 2001, that I wouldn't be surprised if Bin Laden were dead and they refused to allow it to be known for the same reason. However, that is different than saying the Bush ordered us to fail in catching or killing him to prolong the opportunity to act in the Middle East.

Jra


I said shortly thereafter that we were using a hammer with absolutely no anvil in Afghanistan.

Here's the proof:


Dear BuzzFlash,

Afghanistan: The War that Rove Lost

Our brave military didn't fight the war in Afghanistan; Karl Rove did!

That's why THOUSANDS of al Qaeda have escaped, along with bin Laden, Omar and Zawahiri --- the TOP THREE bad guys!

We fought a casualty adverse war and tried to BUY a victory! (How IRONIC.)

We used less than 3000 of 44,000 available special operations troops and failed to secure the borders.

It was a small "hammer" and absolutely NO "anvil."

It was an ABJECT failure and I will NEVER believe that it was the military's choice for a strategy for destroying al Qaeda. When the military finally defends itself, and tells the real story about White House control of this war, it may well be the straw that breaks this administration's back.

Now we are losing "the peace" by waiting on the international community, in JUST this ONE case, to provide the support to rebuild the country. We didn't learn ANYTHING from our FIRST experience in Afghanistan.

I can hardly wait for the NEXT Bush "victory."

Regards,

John E. Haag
Columbus, Ohio

http://www.buzzflash.com/mailbag/2002/08/23_mail.html