If we pulled out of Iraq immediately...

[zasterguava]

Your wrong in the way you are trying to catergorise conspiracy theorist into 3 categories (reductionist, much?)- But your right in that claiming 9/11 was a inside job is both absurd, factually incomprehensible and discredits more worthy and valid criticisms of the government the person may have.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
If you fail to grasp something so simple and obvious and proven as the facts of 9/11

[/ QUOTE ]


Hahaha.


[ QUOTE ]
The Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, speculated that office fires caused the collapse of the building. It, however, acknowledged in its report in May 2002: <font color="red">"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. [...] the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence."</font>
http://11syyskuu.blogspot.com/2006/0...-of-wtc-7.html


[/ QUOTE ]

[NeBlis]

Post deleted by iron81

[Taso]

^why?

[CaptainFreedom]

Osama bin Laden is just a figurehead. It is the movement of Islamic Fundamentalists that is the problem. And the vast majority of those guys are in Saudi Arabia and the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

I think your poll is pretty dumb. It is shortsighted thinking that got the US into the war.

[Steven Bickford]

[ QUOTE ]
Osama bin Laden is just a figurehead. It is the movement of Islamic Fundamentalists that is the problem. And the vast majority of those guys are in Saudi Arabia and the border areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that we should ramp up pressure on Pakistan as well, and pursue military options if necessary. But just because there are terrorists in other regions does not mean we should give the terrorists in Iraq a free pass.

[mosdef]

I don't think OBL is going to change his mind/stated goals at this point. The objective of pulling out of Iraq now would be to:

- Recognize that the stated objectives of the war are not the same as tha actual objectives of the war, and that the actual objectives are being met and are not in the best interest of the majority of American;
- Reduce the probability that current activities are creating OBL version 2020.

Using the on-going problems created by past mistakes to justify/perpetuate current mistakes is not a good idea.

[Phil153]

I think the US would have to stop arming the Israelis and supporting their occupation of Palestine for that to happen.

[Brainwalter]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the US would have to stop arming the Israelis and supporting their occupation of Palestine for that to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously OP what is your point? they declared jihad or whatever before we invaded iraq, why would they cancel it when we leave? And do you think people advocating leaving iraq are doing it to appease the terrorists or something? Wait you probably do.

[boracay]

not a good question IMO. you're not leaving much choice there.
1. as you probably know osama isn't a prime target for a long time. ask yourself why is that? two most probable answers: he's either dead or he's on safe somewhere. i really doubt state enemy No.1 wouldn't be a prime target otherwise.

2. what has OBL to do with situation in iraq? if OBL or AQ would be a real prime target, there definitely wouldn't be an attack on iraq, since iraq under saddam was AQ/fanatics totally free like no other western country. in fact iraq could be US strongest supporter in the whole region regarding religious extremism if that would be a goal.

3. what's the point of your question actually? are you denying that extremism is getting worse every single quarter? either army forces there are not capable of solving the situation or not maybe that is not even a goal. since extremism there is rising every single quarter for years, how could you advocate that occupying forces are doing a good job there since everything talks otherwise? just remember, there was no AQ in iraq before the war and now compare how strong they were 3 years ago and now.

4. of course OBL/AQ wouldn't renounce his jihad. they are insane fanatics. that's why their network/bases should be destroyed as much as possible. was that ever a true goal? how much afford were put in destroying them in their prime territory, pakistan? not much. are they really trying to destroy them in northern afghanistan now? rather they are trying to teach us main AQ centers are in iran, which is another complete lie. they want us to believe shia iran is the reason for extremism in iraq, although most attacks are made by sunnis and while much higher percentage of sunnis (96% if not wrong by last polls) demand leaving iraq for US forces. paradoxically, US is even arming sunnis.

5. probably much better question would be: <u> should US army leave iraq if iraqi government ask them to leave? </u>
or maybe: <u> should US army leave iraq if there would be a most democratic (see the irony here?) choice - a referendum by iraqis? </u> i would definitely say yes in that case. would situation in iraq improve then? probably not in a short time, but it probably be better in 5 years.

6. another good question might be also: <u> do you believe US is safer after attacking iraq or would US be safer if there wouldn't be that adventure? </u>
or maybe: <u> do you believe US is stronger after attacking iraq or would it be stronger without that? </u>
and with those questions also: <u> would you blame more AQ for that or miscalculation of one particular group's interests. </u>