I want to be very clear.

I am placing Sen. Obama’s statement on Pakistan within the framework set up by Pres. Bush. Sen. Obama is suggesting another front on GWOT. The front that would result in our capturing Bint Laden and Omar.

Pres Bush said, ‘… with us or with the terrorist …’ – ‘ … dead or alive …’ – ‘ … will go after the terrorists and those who support them …’

If you agree with Pres Bush then you have to agree with Sen. Obama. The difference is, Sen. Obama did not extend the Bush Doctrine beyond those who planned, took credit for, and executed 9/11. Pres Bush painted with a really big brush, Sen. Obama is just using a smaller brush.

First of all I sincerely doubt that either of those men are “enjoying their freedom”. If they’re alive at all they’re in deep hiding and afraid to go near a cell phone.

I still would prefer to see them dead, despite whatever their lifestyle might, or might not, be. Do you agree?

And because we have not yet succeeded in catching them doesn’t mean we haven’t gone after them, which is what you said.

Yes, they were pursued … unsuccessfully. The pursuit should continue until they are found and killed. Pres Bush said it, now Sen Obama is saying it. Do you agree the pursuit should continue?

So, you’re suggesting that we should have invaded Saudi Arabia?

No. However, if you followed the Bush Doctrine, there would be no question. The question then becomes was Pres Bush sincere about going after the perpertrators of 9/11 and their supporters, or not? Was he just offering frothy rhetoric and red meat? Is he being consistent? Is it as I suggested in my post #15 that there are terrorist, and there are terrorists that we don’t bother … because they are in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan? Answer any, or all of the above.

Listen, a terrorsit is a terrorist, and the only good terrorist is a dead terrorist. Do you agree?

Are you actually saying that an infidel army marching on Mecca and Medina would convince the Muslim extremists to knock it off because the school that educated them is now closed?

No, I am suggesting that if you throw down a marker, establish a doctrine, that you live up to it. In that context, Sen Obama’s statement with regard to Pakistan is consistent with what Pres Bush has said. Do you agree?

And the extremist would knock it off because they would be dead. They would be dead because they support the terrorists, and yes that is what Pres Bush said, too.

You think Bush is wrong on Iraq but you’re advocating the invasion of two nominal allies, one of whom is nuclear armed and the other with Islam’s two holiest cities and the ability to inflame over a billion people against us.

Where have you read that I thought Pres Bush was wrong on Iraq? And, no I am not advocating going into Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Please do not assign motive or intent, when you can simply ask a question. Do you agree?

I am talking about Sen. Obama’s Statement on Pakistan within the framework established by Pres Bush.

If Pres Bush were consistent and lived up to all that he has said, then we not only would have gone into Afghanistan and Iraq, but we would have gone into Syria, gone into Lebanon to support Israel, gone into Saudi Arabia, gone into Pakistan, gone into Iran, gone into Gaza to kill Arafat, and gone into to other places where there are terrorists and their supporters, as well. Do you agree?

I don’t know if you’re insane or just foolish, but either way you’re unworthy of further debate. I deeply hope that no one with your opinions ever gets anywhere near the Presidency.

My opinion is that Pres Bush should say what he means and mean what he says. I would want any person that becomes President to do the same. Do you agree?

We do not have to debate any longer. I just wish you would answer anyone of my questions from a previous post, or a question from this one.

Drudge Report, in his own red font;Obama said Thursday he would not use nuclear weapons ‘in any circumstance’… ‘I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance,’ Obama said, with a pause,…

Any circumstances????

So, I guess, if N. Korea or Iran should fire a nuke at us and Obamamama was President, then we would just stay in our bunkers and wait for submission.

On August 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 am, James Felix said:

I don’t know if you’re insane or just foolish, but either way you’re unworthy of further debate. I deeply hope that no one with your opinions ever gets anywhere near the Presidency.

Well said, I think that goes for all these democrats running for C-n-C of the USA, judging by what they are choosing to say about the war effort.